United States

CONSUMERPRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION
Bethesda, Maryland 20814 MEMORANDUM

DATE: September 12, 2006 TO
:

OGC Todd A. MarthaA. Kosh, OS ( & M

Through: FROM
:

SUBJECT:

Amendment to Fireworks Safety Standards; Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Request for Comments and Information ATTACHED ARE COMMENTS ON THE
CH 06-4 AFFILIATION
5 2 0 7 N.W. Sherwood Dr. Lawton, OK 7 3 5 0 5

COMMENT

DATE
7/04/05

SIGNED BY

CH 0 6 - 4 - 1 CH 0 6 - 4 - 2 CH 0 6 - 4 - 3 CH 0 6 - 4 - 4

M.E. Simpson Kha Torres N. Searle E. Ouellette President

7/05/06 7/05/06 8/04/06

dnsearle8comcast.net American Academy of Pediatrics Dept of Federal Affairs Homer Bldg, Suite 4 0 0 N 601 St, NW Washington, DC 2 0 0 0 5 Lost Yankee Enterprises steve8lostyankee.biz Galaxy Fireworks, Inc. 2 0 4 E. M.L. King Jr. Blvd Tampa, FL 3 3 6 0 3

CH 0 6 - 4 - 5 CH 0 6 - 4 - 6

8/07/06

Steve Smith President Patrick Cook General manager G. Forster

8/10/06

CH 0 6 - 4 - 7 CH 0 6 - 4 - 8

8/10/06 8/18/06

George.Foster@halliburton.com
Jake's Fireworks, Inc. 2 3 1 1 A West 4th St Pittsburgh, KS 66762 Pacific Northwest P.O. Box 1 1 0 6 McKenna, WA 9 8 5 5 8 Wild Bill's Fireworks 3 2 1 Valley Park Dr. Branson, MO 6 5 6 1 6

J. Marietta, Jr Co-owner Ben Turner

CH 0 6 - 4 - 9

8/18/06

CH 0 6 - 4 - 1 0

8/20/06

Noel Braun

Amendment to Fireworks Safety Standards; Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Request for Comments and Information Mike Singletary Fireworks Supercenter 107 Creek View Ct. Weatherford, TX 76088 Wholesale Fireworks Enterprises, LLC 1611 W. Ledgerwood Dr. Andover, KS 67002 Far East Imports, Inc. 5521 N Main Joplin, MO 64801

Larry Hale Operations Mgr.

J. Marietta

J. MacLennan

E. Middendorf

B&B Fireworks 451 Johnson Dr. Russellville, KY

42276

Consumer Jon Nisja President International Fire Marshals Association 1 Batterymarch Park Quincy, MA 02269 ri ~elon@hotmail. com

R.J. Pelon V. Scarpello Hoyt Graham CH 06-4-21 CH 06-4-22
9/06/06 9/07/06

Atlas Importers, Inc. Atlasimr>orters@aol.com Skinsjason8aol .com Thunder Fireworks, Inc. 5207 1 8 7 Street E ~ ~ Tacoma, WA 98446

Jason Skins Debbie R-Gord President B. Yeager James Shannon President & CEO Ralph Ape1 President

CH 06-4-23 CH 06-4-24

9/07/06 9/07/06

National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park Quincy, MA 02169 Black Cat Marketing, USA 5200 W 94th Terrace Suite 112 Prairie Village, KS 66207 blmrs2002@yahoo.com

CH 06-4-25

9/08/06

CH 06-4-26

9/08/06

Bill Morrison

Amendment to Fireworks Safety Standards; Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Request for Comments and Information CH 06-4-27 9/09/06 CH 06-4-28 9/10/06 CH 06-4-29 9/10/06 Karen Metcalf S.J. Thomas Handel First VicePresident Julie Heckman Exec. Director Protechnics Guild International, Inc . 628 Harberts Ct. Annapolis, MD 21401 American Pyrotechnics Association 7910 Woodmont Ave. Suite 1220 Bethesda, MD 20814

CH 06-4-30 9/11/06

CH 06-4-31 9/11/06 CH 06-4-32 9/11/06 CH 06-4-33 9/11/06

Joe Martin Jared Hicks Mark Bolinger Brian Hamilton

brian@jakesfireworks.net

Melissa Crawford SkyKingMel@aol.com Aaron Pfeifer Chris Yozwiak R. Spellman Andrew Webb Jim Ramsey John Rogers Exec. Director Stiflfer808247@aol.com cyozwiak@netzero.net rachelle spellman@hotmail.com 499 River Rd Otsego, MI 49078 jimvtx8gmail.com American Fireworks Standards Laboratory 7316 Wisconsin Ave. Suite 214 Bethesda, MD 20814 myerspyro@aol.com Weeth & Associates, LLC 122 St S La Crosse, WI 54601

Kirk Myers Charles Weeth

Sherwood Dr. 5207 N.W. Lawton, Oklahoma 73505 July 4, 2006

0

Senator Jim lnhofe U. S. Senate Washington, DC 20510 Dear Senator: May I rise with profound indignation for the behavior if the Consumer Products Safety Commission for their tyrannical decision to launch a process that would remove fireworks from public sale. We are not interested in living in a state that regulates everything. I don't like seat belt laws, h e l m e t ' l h or fireworks ban laws. Living in a ralph nader state with everything sterile and absolutely safe would be unacceptable. We are an adventurous people: That is why some of us enjoy skydiving. At this point, I would be most happy if you would write legislation that would abolish Consumer Products Commission or at the very least, impeach them all, unanimously. I should like to describe this bunch of liberal democrats in the most vile and disgusting of epithets. But.. ...once you call them liberal democrats, nothing else is more disgusting than that.

P

Y

~e~ubliwn voter

SPORTS
Hiker falls 75 feet, 3A

entic native outfits, 1B

Mitchell wins Firecri

s by quietly reopening figure has risen steadily since )f how it should police timated 8,000 required treatm r backyard entertain- 2002. The figures show a small

notice A special commission study g&* appear mated that 60 percent of last yeh1('s'

largely voluntary safety p r o ~ a m ; or banning some devices case-by-

Karina Kraft 19% ~l~~~ shown j are

19% to 118 million pounds in 1996 and 281.5 million pounds last year,

Fmel

4

-,

A U-

Page 1 of 2

From:
Sent:

Information Center Wednesday, July 05,2006 3:42 PM 'Kha Torres' Stevenson, Todd A.

To : Cc:

Subject: Fireworks enforcement
Hello, Thank you for contacting the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). We have forwarded your comment to the appropriate agency personnel. If additional information is needed, a representative will contact you directly.
P l e a s e be a d v i s e d that you may obtain CPSC publications, recalls and g e n e r a l s a f e t y related information via our web site at ~ww.cpsc.gov. Click on the "Search1'icon and type in your topic. You may also file an incident report via the web site mentioned above. If you have additional inquiries, you may call our toll-free hotline at 1-800-638-2772, Monday - Friday, 8:30am to 5:00pm, Eastern Standard Time. Press 1 to begin and then press 3 to speak with a representative.

From: Kha Torres [mailto: khatores@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 04,2006 4:09 AM To: Chairman Stratton Subject: [Possibly SPAM (header): ] - Fireworks enforcement Email has different SMTP TO: and MIME TO: fields in the email addresses

-

Hi, It's nice to see that you're going after homemade fireworks. Science will never be the same again when we can't practice it in our backyards like we have half a brain. Actually, we need a nanny state to watch over us at all times, lest we blow ourselves up. Your enforcement restricts the freedom of American innovation and is killing science. Maybe this will give you some insight into the real effects that your efforts have:

http:Nwww.wired.com/wired~archive/14.06/chemistry.html "Intel cofounder Gordon Moore set off his first boom in Silicon Valley two decades before pioneering the design of the integrated circuit. One afternoon in 1940, near the spot where Interstate 280 intersects Sand Hill Road today, the future father of the semiconductor industry knelt beside a cache of homemade dynamite and lit the hse. He was 11 years old."
I remember doing similar type things (and still do, as a matter of fact). Please, run around and pillow everything so that no one can possibly get hurt, take risks, or ever see any kind of remotely beneficial results. Bleah. Kha

Page 1 o f 1

-

Stevenson, Todd A.
---p--h,p-w------- -.- - -- .----------. ... -

From:
Sent: To :

Cohn, Murray S. Wednesday, July 05, 2006 7:47 AM Stevenson, Todd A.

Go
-

3

Subject: FW: Fireworks

A "public comment" - do what you want with it - thanks!
-.-."
""

From: n searle [mailto:dnsearle@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 11:31 AM To: Cohn, Murray S. Subject: Fireworks
You can't stop the fireworks from being sold ...the Indians sell all the illegal fireworks anyone wants ...the only way is to make it illegal to USE them. Every year it gets worse with the local people setting them off. We need to pass laws to stop anyone from using them unless they are qualified and have permits to use them at public functions! N. Searle Vancouver Wa.

American Academy of Pediatrics
DEDICATED TO T H E HEALTH OF ALL CHILDREN"

AAP Headquarters 141 Northwest Point Blvd Elk Grove Village, IL 60007-1098 Phone: 84714344000 Fax: 8471434-8000 E-mail: kidsdocs@aap.org w.aap.org Reply to Department of Federal Affairs Homer Building. Suite 400 N 601 13th St NW Washington, DC 20005 Phone: 2021347-8600 Fax: 2021393-6137 E-mail: kidslst@aap.org Executive Committee President Eileen M. Ouellette, MD, JD, FAAP President-Elect Jay E. Berkelhamer. MD. FAAP Executive DirectorICEO Errol R. Alden, MD, FAAP Board of Directors District I Edward N. Bailey. MD. FAAP Salem. MA District I1 Henry A. Schaeffer, MD, FAAP Brooklyn, NY District Ill Sandra Gibson Hassink. MD. FAAP Wilmington. DE District lV David T. Tayloe, Jr. MD. FAAP Goldsboro. NC District V Ellen Buerk. MD. MEd. FAAP Oxford. OH District VI Kathryn Piziali Nichol, MD, FAAP Madison. WI District VII Gary Q. Peck, MD, FAAP New Orleans, LA District Vlll Mary P. Brown, MD. FAAJ Bend, OR District IX Burton F. Willis. MD. FAAP Huntington Beach, CA District X John S. Curran. MD, FAAP Tampa, FL Immediate Past President Zarol D. Berkowitz. MD. FAAP

August 4,2006 Nancy Nord, JD Acting Chairwoman Consumer Product Safety Commission Room 502 4330 East-West Highway Bethesda, MD 208 14 Dear Chairwoman Nord: The American Academy of Pediatrics, a non-profit professional organization of 60,000 primary care pediatricians, pediatric medical sub-specialists, and pediatric surgical specialists dedicated to the health, safety, and well-being of infants, children, adolescents, and young adults, urges you to ban all consumer fireworks pursuant to the advance notice of proposed rulemaking regarding an amendment to fireworks safety standards published in the Federal Register on July 12,2006. Since 1991, the American Academy of Pediatrics has urged governmental bodies to ban all fireworks for individual private use.' Children and their families should be encouraged to enjoy fireworks at public fireworks displays conducted by professionals rather than purchase fireworks for personal use.2 The Academy applauds the CPSC for recognizing that current fireworks regulations are insufficient to prevent death and injury, as recent injury and noncompliance statistics reflect. However, each of the Commission's proposed alternatives fails to provide an adequate solution to the problem. As you know, under its jwisdiction to regulate fireworks under the Federal Hazardous Substances Act (FHSA), the CPSC regularly tests imported fireworks to ensure that the products comply with agency specifications. While the overall percentage rate of compliance of tested fireworks remained consistent between 2002 and 2004 (71%, 73%, and 73% respectively), the compliance rate dropped to just 59% of the fireworks tested in 2005

.'

Even more troublesome is the increase in the estimated nurnber of fireworks-related injuries in recent years. In 2002, fireworks devices were involved in an estimated 8,000 injuries requiring treatment in U.S. hospital emergency rooms. Each year since, that number has risen, to 9,300 in 2003,9,600 in 2004, and 10,800 in 2005. Injuries to children were a major component of total fireworks-related injuries, with children under 15 years of age accounting for 45% of the estimated injuries. Children and adolescents under 20 years of age accounted for 55% of i n j ~ r i e s . ~

As you are aware, the advance notice of proposed rulemaking lists several alternatives that could be employed by the agency to combat this disturbing rise in fireworks-related injuries, including mandatory certification, reliance on a voluntary standard, corrective actions, or a mandatory standard, whereby "the Commission could issue a rule specifying certain additional requirements fueworks devices must meet."' However, each of these alternatives is insufficient to protect children's safety. Mandatory certification requirements or the imposition of voluntary or mandatory standards are ineffective because malfunctions of consumer fireworks account for only a small percentage of i n j ~ r i e s .Corrective actions occur only after the risk of harm has been detected, which is often ~ too late to prevent injuries and deaths from occurring. Moreover, it is not enough to simply classify certain types of fireworks as "banned hazardous substances" under the FHSA, as is the current policy of the CPSC, given that_"every type of legally available consumer (so-called 'safe and sane') firework has been associated with serious injury or death."7 The clear danger posed by consumer fireworks and rising toll of injury they cause can only be addressed adequately through a ban on fireworks sold for personal use. Any lesser measure will not be fully protective of children's health and welfare. The AAP appreciates the Commission's consideration of this matter. If the Academy can be of W h e r assistance, please do not hesitate to contact Cindy Pellegrini in our Washington, DC office at 202-347-8600. We look forward to continuing to work with the Commission to protect the health and safety of our nation's children. Sincerely,

I

Eileen M. Ouellette, MD, JD, FAAP President
Committee on Injury and Poison Prevention. Children and Fireworks. Pediatrics. 1991;88(3). American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Injury and Poison Prevention. Fireworks-Related Injuries to Children. Pediatrics. 2001; 108(1). 3 Consumer Product Safety Commission. Amendment to Fireworks Safety Standards. Federal Register. July 12, 2006. Ibid. Ibid. American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Injury and Poison Prevention. Fireworks-Related Injuries to Children. Pediatrics. 2001;108(1). Bid.
1

Page 1 of 1

steven smith [lostyank54751@yahoo.com] Monday, August 07,2006 8:17 PM Sent: To : Stevenson, Todd A. Subject: FIREWORKS ANPR.
From:

I'm a member of the oldest and safest pyrotechnic club in the USA. We provide safety training, demonstrations, guided tours of 1.4g and 1.3g displays. We also have a few members who occasionally fabricate shells. One shell was a Maltese style multi shot shell that carried the remains of one of the founding members of are club. Shell was fired by his wife during a NYE display. We also train Girl and Boy Scouts in the fabrication of gerb signs like the one used to welcome home troops. Why is this practice being treated as an illegal act by making it impossible to purchase the chemicals needed in this art form? Restricting sales from Hurnrnal and others to the smaller chemical houses is limiting the creative efforts that have brought many to the world of chemistry, physics and space. Would you call the boys in October Sky criminals? For my part, I do not work with, store, handle or in any other way possess any compositions of higher energy than compounds based on Potassium Perchlorate. This is not flash, whistle, H3 or any of the other sensitive compositions that have a wide history in pyrotechnics. I do not handle these compositions because I can not justify the risk and can produce similar effects with safer chemicals. So why after being anally safe for many years are you forcing folk like me to consider using compositions of greater hazards just because we can obtain these chemicals from other sources than Firefox, Shylighter, ... ? I have no argument with increasing fireworks safety. I teach fireworks safety. But limiting access to chemicals not only to pyros, but schools, labs and inventors, is not in the interest of the country. We need scientists. Please enforce magnatory safety training and discontinue procedures against the pyrotechnic chemical houses. Steve Smith President - Lost Yankee Enterprises Http://www.lostyankee.biz steve@,lostyankee.biz Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates startine, at 1t l m h

Galaxy Fireworks, Inc.
204 E. M.L. King Jr. Blvd. Tampa, F1.33603
August 10,2006 Office of the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 502, 4330 East-West Highway Bethesda, Maryland 208 14 Re.: Fireworks ANPR, July 22,2006

Dear Sir or Madam,
This letter is in regards to the Request for Comments on the above noted action posted by the CPSC in the Federal Register. I have some co~3ems this issue that should be on

~ ~ t h e C ~ * t ; o a n ~ ~ ~ i n t h k s : ~ ~ I ~ ~ * a g w i t h ~ o m m i ~ ~ e o ~ i e ' si&t h a t t h i s A N P ~ h a s m m e ~ u t i n r t r a t b e ~ ~ n mmer, almost as if the authors did not want the public to know of its nature.
At this time I would also like to object to the way that the fireworksinjury figureswere addressed by the author of the ANPR. Here we see a deliberate attempt to put our products in the worst possible light, with only minimal refe3.ence to the massive increase in the amounts of fireworks products imported over the past three years, or the reduction in injuries due to the increased quality of our products. When Commissioner Moore made the remark about the "significant upward trend in fireworks injuries since 1 9 9 6he ~ ~ obviously had not seen all of the facts concerning the quafltitiesofco~~~verstlshiil?)arJr~~froanthe CPSC database. While the injury rate increased slimy h 1996&rot@ 1998, since that time we as an industry have seen a steady downward trend in the injury rate figures as compared to the upward trend of products imported3.
Iw o d d l & e t o ~ W ~ ~ i s a ~ ~ d t l n r e A Fireworks StanLaboratMy (AFSL)and the testing p q p m s a d pmazhs that they have idiated on behalf of the fireworks idusby. I also feel that the decline in injuries that we have seen over the years is a direct result of the testing and procedures t a have voluntdy been aaqkd by many of our kbx&y% m e m h However,I do ht
Statement of the Honorable Thomas M m ,June 3 4 2006; http://www.cpsc.~ov/ur/moore€iieworks.pdf Ibid. Fireworks Related Injury Rates, 1976-2005, American -technics Association; httr,://www.america~o.com/Safe~/o20Info/Facts02/iniu~ytable.~df
C o d i M i t y Notice: This docrrmcnf imludi~g ab9mm&, is intended for the sole ise o tbt pcrsoe(s) shown rs dpiu$s Pnd my f may contain &dentid m privileged i n f i m This document should not be r e v i d by, uscd by, retained by o d k c b d t d r o any U n a l d l l person($). Thaal; y u ~ o
1

not think that it (the AFSL) should be singled out as the only testing facility authorized for the testing procedures.

I also object to the idea of having a single laboratory to accomplish testing for the entire industry. We as an industry have already seen times where production has overwhelmed the testing capabilities at the AFSL facilities, and this would be worsened should the Commission take the unlikely step of mandatiig all testing be accomplished at AFSL facilities. I also feel that the instdlation of a single entity as the primary testing agency could lead to legal difficulties and politid idighting (both in the industry and wt the ih t Commission) in the future. This scenario needs to be avoided a all costs.
There seems to be a general sense of inference fiom the CPSC that the AFSL is the only body capable of properly testing f i r e m devices This inhmce is mkdW in this ANPR and in other recent legal actions4. To this end,there should be z i d b m of ~ ~ three independent Mombrb laboratories& by the CPSC to accomplish the testing, and a listing of laboratories should be made available to the industry by the CPSC. Any regulation formulated in this amt dmdd also a n y the optionfix t e ampamy itself t h o accomplish any required (or recommended) testing should they so desire.

,

That being said, I do feel that the CPSC guidelines, as detailed in 16 CFR, should include firmmks dwices. This m I be a x c # n p W by ud clearer g d e h e s for 0 inwstamdards such as those &doped by and for tbe A S ' and should also EL, include the APA Standarrl87-l6that has been adopted by the bpmtment of Transportation. I would also urge that any testing requirement, if instituted, be installed
as a voluntary requirement by the individual company rather than as a mandated requirement for the entire industry.
o= occucs in the Inclusions on this line would clarify the cmfkion that s& enforcement process by the Commission, and would also help to educate the general public on the parts that both the government and the industry play in continually upgrading the safety and performance of our products. Should there be any questions please do not hesitate to contact me immediately at either the telephone number above, or hn at galaxvfireO,aol.com . T a k you for your time in this matter.

Patrick Cook General Manager
See US.v. Winco,5,6 (Kansas District Court, Case No. 89-2400-0,2005) S e e St&& for Colcsumer Firewwb, F e h w y 2005, Amemcan FimMsksstnnA.rrk-, . 6 Standardfor Co~tmction Approval for Tronsporfm-onf F i m k , Novelties, mrd lkatrical and o pVroCedu,ics, Ameriw Pyrote.cbnk Association, 2001; ~//www.american~vro.com/Member/Re1~u1at0nP/020Re~o~~~e~/APA%20871/APA87 1.pdf
5

ConfdcntialiNotia:This d o a r m e n t , h r c k d i D g ~ P T ~ , P W P u t L d ~ d t L ~ ~ a ~ ~ i l l e may contain confidential sod privilegedinfbmaioa This doanncnt shouM mib mrieaRd by, used by, nebrPtdby a &&tied $, c any t J m d m k d pescm(s}. TbdK you.

Sbhment of Tbe Honorable Thomas H Moome on the Ballot Vote t Issuean . o

ANPR on Fmrks Devices
June 30,2006

While I am voting t go fonmtrrfwith this Advance Notice ofProposed Rdemakhg o (ANPR),Idowanttnexpress~rneconcemssboutit.First,thispackageispiuticularly thin in tezms ofooasent. It ha9 little ofthe suppartirlg i n f d w would lkormally e ~boseeto~toanANPRdIwasgivenno~priorto~~the Maaboutdsedhrthe~mto~suchastep.

~,tbsla&ofm~oftbe~ofHazardIdmtificatMnaad Radtictiaamtbbmisqjmrent ~ i s m ~ j \ l s t i f i r i a g t h e A N P R s j m r t d r o m II#~~naaaa@umtkOarraalCowaei's~wbichis~mbepessiag ~ a e t b t 4 # ~ ~ f t B t ~ m t ~ t b e b a s i s fW h r d t o a i ttre-aaaIatsppri luwdai~ o f ~ t b p u b l i c m n a t i c c t b a t t h c -.

~ ~ l ~ s ~ r e t i o n k & i s ~ s i n c e t b e e a t i r e b a U o t w a s ~

"Far~UseChdy-" Ho~,~isaEmastaothiaginbbeIegalmemotbasdoes aatappearinthep~FaderalRegisterm~sl,d~~~1~~shodd not have been a k t o r in keeping tbe public in the dark an tbis
I h p v e ~ - o a p e v i a n -s - a b o l d t h e ~'sactionsbkag ~ hept~~cvicwuoQil~aCommsmn~ TheCuixuniWsW-DS psr~sqmedbbeQaeinpnblicThisiswhythtCammsmm's-specifythat ~ p m d y ~ ~ s b d d b e d o n Wedomtservethepnbtic~ll e b y ~ when take the first step in a p o s s i i r u k d b gprocess in thismaum. W need to e b e ~ ~ o f c a ~ a ~ o a s t o o u r ~ d t r s .

.

*

..

=

HOW, as I do considerANPR's t bt fkt-fhxibg -Is and since these bas been a o ~ u j w a r d t m m d i n ~ ~ i n ~ e s s1996,fc e i i v o t e t o ~ i n wi mune~mintbissrea

'AMERICAN PYROTECHNICS ASSOCIATION

Fireworks-Related Injury Rates, 1976-2005

Summary ofTrade and Trf I n h a t i o n - i e o k (TSUSItem 755.15), U S InternationalTrade Commission, aif Frwrs .. Washington,D.C. National E e t o i Injury Surveillance System, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, W a s h i , D.C. lcrnc
Source: American Pyrotechnics Associababon

'

FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

I5 0 ;

~ -21 pn 2: p 8

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.

Civil No. 89-2400-0

-

WINCO FIREWORKS INC., and DAVID COLLAR, Defendants. MODIFIED COKSENT DECREE OF PERMANENT NJUNCTION On March 6,1990, this Court entered a Consent Decree of Pennanent Injunction ("Consent Decreey')against WINCO FIREWORKS, INC., a corporation, and DAVID COLLAR,

an individual, for relief against Defendants under the Federal Hazardous Substances Act
("FHSA"), I5 U.S.C.
1261 et sea,, k d the regulations issued thereunder. Plaintiff and

Defendants now have agreed to the present Modified Consent Decree of Permanent Injunction

and for Payment of Civil Penalties ("Modified Decree") which supersedes the original Consent
Decree in this case. Plaintiff has also agreed not to file a motion for an order to sbow cause why Defendants or Related Persons, (as defined in paragraph 2 of this Modified Decree), should not be held in contempt based upon conduct through and including June 27,2005. Based upon this Modified Decree, Plaintiff also has agreed not to file a complaint, or initiate criminal or other enforcement proceedings, alleging violations by Defendants or Related Persons of the FHSA during the five years preceding the entry of this Modified Decree, as well as violations of the Consumer Product Safety Act ("CPSA"), 15 U.S.C.
2051 a seq. Accordingly, based upon this

Modified Decree, neither Plaintiff nor the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission

("CPSC") will seek any additional penalties, civil or criminal, or initiate any further enforcement proceedings, against Defendants or Related Persons, based upon the violations alleged in CPSC's letter by Dennis Kacoyanis, dated September 13,2004, to Robin E. Scully. Defendants have consented to the entry of this Modified Decree in settlement of the contemplated motion to show cause and contemplated complaint, without admitting that they were ever in contempt of the Consent Decree or in violation of the FHSA or CPSA. THEREFORE, on the joint motion of the parties, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED 'THAT:
1.

This Court has jurisdiction over the matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

$9 1331, 1337,

and 1345 and has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants and the Related Persons. Venue in

$4 this District is based on 28 U.S.C. 1391 (b) and (c).
I. DEFINITIONS
2.

For purposes of this Modified Decree, the following terms have the following

meanings: A. "Defendants" are Winco Fireworks, Inc., a corporation, and David Collar,

an individual.
B.
"Related Persons," for purposes of this Modified Decree only in order to

reach a settlement of this overall matter, includes but is not limited to Michsel Collar, John Collar, Winco Fireworks International, LLC, Winco Fireworks of Utah, LLC, and Zenith Specialties, Inc. In addition, "Related Persons" includes each and all of Defendants' directors, officers, agents, representatives, employees, assigns, and any or all persons in active concert or participation with any of them, and having anything to do with the import, assembly,

manufacture, sale, or distribution of fireworks devices. C. "Consent Decree" means the Consent Decree of Permanent Injunction

entered by this Court on March 6, 1990.

If. C M L PENALTIES
3.

Plaintiff alleges that after March 6,1990, Defendants have knowingly introduced

or cau'sed the introduction in interstate commerce of lots of fireworks devices that failed to comply with the Commission's Fireworks Regulations at 16 C.F.R. Part 1507 and 16 C.F.R.

$3 1500.14(b)(7) and 1500.17(a)(3), and are therefore banned hazardous substances pursuant to
section 2(q)(l)(B) of the FHSA, I 5 U.S.C. §1261(q)(l)(B), in violation of section 4(a) of the

FHSA, 15 U.S.C. $ 1263(a).
4.

Plaintiff alleges that on or about June 8,2000, Defendants obtained information

which reasonably supported the conclusion that the Hustler, a fireworks product with mortar

ik tubes and shells, contained an unreasonable r s of serious injury or a defect which could create a
substantial product hazard. Specifically, tubes included in the Hustler and used to fire mortar type shells could unravel during use. If that happened, explosive materials could escape out the side of the tube and injure the consumer f i g the device. Defendants knowingly failed to repott to the Commission such defect, risk, or death as required by sections 15(b)(2) and (3) of the
CPSA, 15 U.S.C.

$9 2064@)(2) a

d (3), in violation of section 19(a)(4) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C.

§ 2068(a)(4). Plaintiff does not know of any other instances where Defendants have failed to

comply with the CPSA in the last five years. 5. Defendants deny each and all of the foregoing allegations, and specifically allege

that they have in good faith attempted to comply with the Consent Decree's provisions and with

the requirements of the FHSA and CPSA. Defendants enter into this Modified Decree in order to avoid the expense, distraction, and uncertainty of litigation and to bring closure to this matter, without admitting to any wrongdoing. 6. In settlement of the allegations set forth above, David Collar, Winco Fireworks

Inc., Winco Fireworks International, LLC and Winco Fireworks of Utah, LLC ("Collar/Winco") agree to pay a civil penalty in the total amount of six hundred thousand dollars ($600,000), to be paid in equal installments of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000). CollarWinco shall be jointly and severally liable for payment of the foregoing civil penalty amount. Within sixty (60) days of entry of this Modified Decree by the Court, the initial payment of $100,000 shall be made by Collar/Winco in the form of a certified or cashier's check made payable to the Treasurer of the United States and sent by overnight delivery to the Director, Office of Consumer Litigation, Civil Division, 133 1 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Rm 950N, Washington, D.C. 20004.
The cover letter accompanying the check shall include the title of this litigation and a reference

to DJ# 104-29-26. The remaining installment payments of $100,000 shall be made in the same form and to the same address on an annual basis thereafter (k,second installment shall be the paid one year from the date of the fmt payment, the third installment shall be paid two years

f o the date of the first payment, and so forth). Upon the failure of Collar/Winco to make a rm
payment or upon CollarWinco making a late payment (a) the entire amount of the civil penalty shall be due and payable, and (b) interest on the outstanding balance shall accrue and be paid at the federal legal rate of interest under the provisions of 28 U.S.C.

$4 1961(a) and (c).

111. INJUNCTIVE PROVISIONS

7.

Defendants and Related Persons are permanently restrained and enjoined under

15 U.S.C.

$9 1263(a), 1263(c), and 1267(a) fiom directly or inditectly introducing, delivering for

introduction, or receiving and delivering or proffering for delivery in interstate commerce fireworks devices that are banned hazardous substances pursuant to the FHSA, 15 U.S.C. 1261(q)(l)(B), and the regulations issued thereunder, 16 C.F.R.

$5 1500.17 (a)(3), (a)(8), and

(a)(9) and 16 C.F.R. Part 1507 (hereafter "banning regulations"), or misbranded hazardous substances pursuant to the FHSA, 15 U.S.C. thereunder, 16 C.F.R. regulations").
8.

$9 1261(p) and 1262(b), and the regulations issued

1500.14@)(7) and 16 C.F.R § 1500.121 (hereafter "misbranding

In addition to and in accordance with the preceding paragraph, the Defendants

and Related Persons are permanently restrained and enjoined from directly or through their agents introducing, delivering for introduction, or receiving and delivering or proffering for delivery in interstate commerce, fireworks subject to the FHSA unless and d l : All fireworks devices imported by Defendants and Related Persons have been tested and certified as in compliance with the applicable U.S. laws and regulations by the American Fireworks Standards Laboratory ("AFSL") or an independent third party that has been accepted by the Director, Office of Compliance, CPSC. Such testing shall be at Defendants' and Related Persons' expense. This Paragraph shall take effect for any order of fireworks devices placed by Defendants or Related Persons after the date this Decree is entered. Defendants and Related Persons shall maintain at a U.S. location(s) the actual test reports for each item imported for a period of six (6) years fiom the date of testing.
9.

If Defendants and Related Persons do not use AFSL for testing and certification,

then they shall submit the narne and credentials of the independent third party they propose to

use (required by paragraph 8 of this Modified Decree) to the Director, Office of Compliance, CPSC, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, via overnight delivery and facsimile at 301-504-0359, no later than 60 days prior to using any subject third party. The Director, Office of Compliance shall have the right to object to the independent third party selected by Defendants and Related Persons, provided that such objection is supported by reasonable grounds. The Director must notie Defendants and Related Persons of an objection within thirty (30) calendar days of Defendants and Related Persons submitting the third party's name and credentials, at which point Defendants and Related Persons shall select another independent third party, the name and credentials of which shall be submitted to the Director, Office of Compliance. Alternatively, Defendants and Related Persons shall have the right to file a motion before this Court seeking review of such objection as unreasonable, and if this Court finds that the objection was not founded on reasonable grounds said objection shall be set aside. If the Director, Office of Compliance does not respond to Defendants' and Related Persons' submission of an independent third party's name and credentials within thirty (30) days, Defendants and Related Persons may use that independent third party to do the testing and certification required by paragraph 8 of this Modified Decree. 10. With respect to the introduction, delivery for introduction into interstate

commerce or the receipt in interstate commerce of any fireworks products manufactured andlor assembled in the United States andlor its possessions and territories and not tested and certified under the foregoing paragraphs 8 or 9, Defendants and Related Persons shall, for a period of one year from the date they receive notice of the entry of this Modified Decree, send a notice to the Commission of sales of such products by sending to the Commission a copy of the invoice or

notice document prepared for the Commission containing similar information by (i) facsimile to Fireworks Program Manager at 301-504-0359, or (ii) overnight delivery service sent to Fireworks Program Manager, Office of Compliance, CPSC, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda,

MD 20814), or (iii) email to JJoholskeO,cpsc.~ov to an email address provided by the CPSC; or
within three days of shipment. For each product, the documentation sent to the Commission shall state: the type of fireworks devices (i.e.. combination items; comets, mines and shells; firecrackers; fountains; ground spinners and chasers; specialty items; party, trick, and toy smoke devices; reloadable tube aerial shells; roman candles; sky rockets, missiles, and helicopters; hand-held sparkling devices; or wheels), the name and quantity of the products sold, and the identity and address of the recipient. Pricing and any other proprietary information may be deleted or redacted from the documents provided to the Commission.
1 1.

Defendants and Related Persons shall notify the Commission by certified mail,

return receipt requested, to Fireworks Program Manager, Office of Compliance CPSC, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814 of any changes in the corporate structure of Defendants and Related Persons (such as dissolution, reorganization, assignment, or sale resulting in the emergence of a successor corporation, or the creation or dissolution of subsidiaries) that may affect the compliance obligations arising out of this Modified Decree, and make reasonable efforts to give such notice as far in advance of such change as is practicable, but, in any event, not later than thirty (30) days before such change becomes final. The Defendants and Related Persons shall provide a copy of this Modified Decree to any successor or assign.
12.

Defendants and Related Persons shall provide a copy of this Modified Decree to

each officer, director, and supervisor of Defendants and Related Persons within thirty (30) days

of the date of entry of this Modified Decree, and provide both Fireworks Program Manager of the Commission and the Plaintiffs attorneys with an affidavit of compliance within thirty (30) days after the date of entry of this Modified Decree, stating the fact and manner of compliance
with this paragraph and identifying the names and positions of all person so notified.

IV. GENERAL PROVISIONS

13.

Commission investigators shall be authorized to make inspections of Defkndants'

and Related Persons' facilities to inspect the records required pursuant to this Modified Decree to ensure continuing compliance with the terns of this Modified Decree. Such inspections shall be authorized upon presentation of appropriate credentials and a written notice specifying that such inspection is being requested in accordance with this Modified Decree. Such inspection authority granted by this Modified Decree is apart from and in addition to the authority to make inspections under 15 U.S.C. 14.

$4 1270 and 1271.

Defendants may petition this Court to rescind the provisions of this Modified

Decree after a period of ten (10) years from the entry of this Modified Decree. If, in the Commission staffs judgment, Defendants and Related Persons have maintained a state of continuous compliance with this Modified Decree, Plaintiff will not oppose such petition. 15. This Court shall retain jurisdiction of this matter for the purpose of enabling any

party to this Modified Decree to apply for any further orders that may be needed to construe, carry out, modify, or enforce compliance with the terms of this Modified Decree.

16.

Each party shall bear its own costs and attorney's fees.

SO ORDERED:

Dated t h i s 3 0 day of

3

We hereby consent to the entry of the foregoing Modified Decree.

FOR THE PLAINTIFF:
ERIC F. MELGREN United States Attorney District of Kansas

FOR THE DEFENDANTS AND RELATED PERSONS:

DAVID COLLAR

-

PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General

& j
~tton@ . Office of Consumer Litigation U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 386 Washington, D .C. 20044 (202) 307-0053 (202) 5 14-8742 (facsimile) OF COUNSEL:

COLLAR

P TERL. WINK

1A.p~

Latham & Watkins LLP 555 Eleventh St. NW, Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20004-1304 (202) 637-2224 (202) 637-220 1 (facsimile) Counsel for Defendants

PAGE C.FAULK General Counsel Consumer Product Safety Commission

HARRIET KERWTN
Attorney Consumer Product Safety Commission Washington, D.C. 20207

APA STANDARD 87-1

2001 APA STANDARD 87-1
STANDARD FOR CONSTRUCTION AND APPROVAL FOR TRANSPORTATION OF FIREWORKS, NOVELTIES, AND THEATRICAL PYROTECHNICS

The following does not contain Appendix A-D. To purchase the publication in its entirety use order form found o n the APA website, or contact the APA office.

American Pyrotechnics Association PO Box 30438 Bethesda, M D 20824 (301) 907-8181 www.americanpyro.com

) American Pyrotechnics Association 2004

APA STANDARD 87-1
Contents 1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 1
2. 3. DEFINITIONS ..................................................................................................... 1 REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSUMER FIREWORKS. NOVELTIES AND THEATRICAL PYROTECHNICS ....................................................................... 4 4 3.1 Types of Consumer Fireworks ......................................................................... 3.2 Types of Novelties ........................................................................................... 7 3.4 Other Devices .................................................................................................. 8 3.6 Specific Requirements for Consumer Fireworks................................................9 3.7 Prohibited Chemicals and Components.......................................................... 1 1 3.8 Requirements for Theatrical Pyrotechnics .........................................................12 3.9 Approval .........................................................................................................12 13 3.10 Marking and Labeling..................................................................................... 4. REQUIREMENTS FOR DISPLAY FIREWORKS DEVICES .............................13 4.1 Types of Display Fireworks Devices.................................................................13 4.2 Construction of Aerial Shells.............................................................................14 4.3 Approval ..........................................................................................................15 4.3-1 Standard Fireworks Chemicals Table ............................................................ 16 4.4 Approval for Combination Devices for Display Purposes .................................17 5. SHIPPING REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................-17 5.3 Packaging Provisions for Fireworks.................................................................. 18 5.7 Special Packaging Provisions for Private Motor Carriers ..................................19 5.8 Attachment of Igniters Prior to Transportation................................................... 19 6. REFERENCES ..................................................................................................... 20

Appendices: (This document does not contain Appendices . To purchase the publication in its
entirety. use order form found on the APA website. or contact the APA office.)

Appendix A: Types of Fireworks and Novelties Appendix B: Consumer Fireworks Testing Program Appendix C: Product Labeling Requirements for Consumer Fireworks Appendix D: Procedure for Obtaining EX Numbers

Note: Changes from the January 1998 edition are indicated in bold type and underlined.
Copyright ) 2003 APA. All Rights Reserved
Version 12101/01 Effective 10101/03 68 Fed Reg. 48562 Reprinted 1/04

APA STANDARD 87-1

APA STANDARD 87-1 PREFACE

The information contained in this document was obtained from sources believed to be reliable and is based on technical information and experience currently available h m members of the American Pyrotechnics Association and others. However, the Association, nor its members, jointly or severally, make no guarantee of the results and assume no liability or responsibility in connection with the information or suggestions contained within, or that abnormal or unusual circumstances may not warrant or suggest fkther requirements or additional procedures. This document is subject to periodic review and users are cautioned to obtain the latest edition. Comments and suggestions are invited from all users for consideration by the Association in connection with such review. Any such comments or suggestions will be fblly reviewed by the Association after giving the party, upon request, a reasonable opportunity to be heard. This document should not be conbed with federal, state or municipal specifications or regulations, insurance requirements or national safety codes. However, when incorporated by reference in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), those portions of this document applying to transportation (indicated in this document by an asterisk) have the force of a federal regulation, and shippers of fireworks are subject to penalties pertaining thereto. Every effort has been made to keep this Standard consistent with the Department of Transportation's Hazardous Materials Regulations in Title 49, CFR.

The 2001 revisions are intended to address technical questions that have arisen regarding the wording of several sections of the January, 1998 edition of this Standard, including the approval of aerial shells under this Standard. Clarification of the status of certain pyrotechnic novelties has also been incorporated into this edition.
Unless otherwise noted, all CFR references cited in this Standard refer to those sections in effect on January 1,2001.

APA, STANDARD 87-1 1. INTRODUCTION

* 1.1 This standard provides manufacturers, importers and distributors of fireworks and novelties with information to assist them in manufacturing, testing, shipping, and labeling the products of the fireworks industry in accordance with applicable federal laws and current good manufacturing practices (GMPs). Paragraphs of this Standard which apply to the approval by the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) for transportation of fireworks are indicated by an asterisk (*) preceding the paragraph number. * 1.2 The information i this Standard should enable manufacturers, importers, and n
distributors of fireworks and novelties to provide their customers with products that can be transported and used safely and without unreasonable risk.

* 1.3 Fireworks, pyrotechnic articles for theatrical purposes, and novelties are not acceptable for transportation within the jurisdiction of the United States unless they are classed, packaged, labeled, and marked and are in proper condition for shipment in accordance with the DOT regulations in Title 49, CFR. (See Chapter 5 for firher discussion.) * 1.4 Consumer fireworks (fueworks classed as 1.4G and 1.4s) (formerly Fireworks, Common) and novelties are not acceptable for sale to the public unless they are manufactured, labeled, and sold in conformance with the regulations of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) published in Title 16, CFR. (See Chapter 3 for firher discussion.)
Note: Consumer fireworks are normally classed as 1.4G but may be classed by DOT as 1.4s on the basis of examination and testing in accordance with Title 49 CFR, 8 173.56.

* 1.5 United States laws and regulations prescribe mandatory requirements that a person
must follow in order to market certain products. In these instances, failure to comply may be regarded by courts as negligence per se in product liability litigation.

* 1.6 This Standard applies to fireworks devices, pyrotechnic articles, and novelties for entertainment purposes.
2. DEFINITIONS
For purposes of this Standard, approval means the assignment of proper hazard class, EX (explosives approval) number, proper shipping name, and UN (United Nations) identification number by the DOT so that fireworks and novelties may be transported under conditions specified in Title 49, CFR. (See Chapter 5 for details.)

* 2.1 Approval

* 2.2 Black Match (Instantaneous Fuse) An uncovered fuse made fiom thread impregnated with black powder and used for igniting pyrotechnic devices. Black Match may be classed as 1.3G and described as Fuse, non-detonating, UZVOIO1, under the provisions of this Standard. For any other classification, examination and testing as specified in Title 49 CFR, 5 173.56, CFR is required. (See also Quickmatch.) * 2.3 Blowout The unintended release of a pressure effect fiom other than the intended orifice of a fireworks device. Examples include expulsion of the bottom plug of a roman candle,
1

APA, STANDARD 87-1 expulsion of the clay choke of a fountain, or the rupturing of the wall of a mine or shell.

* 2.4 Burnout The unintended escape of flame through the wall of a pyrotechnic chamber during hctioning of a fireworks device.

* 2.5 Burst Charge Chemical composition used to break open a fireworks device after it has been propelled into the air, producing a secondary effect such as a shower of stars. Burst charge is also sometimes referred to as expelling charge or break charge. Any burst charge containing metallic powder (such as magnalium or aluminum) less than 100 mesh in particle size, is considered to be intended to produce an audible effect, and is limited to 130 mg in 1.46 fireworks devices. Burst charge consisting of black powder or equivalent non-metallic composition is not considered to be intended to produce an audible effect when it is used to expel and ignite a secondary effect in a fireworks device. Burst charge for use in 1.36 fireworks is limited to black powder Jpotassium nitrate, sulfur, and charcoal) or similar pyrotechnic composition without metallic fuel for approval under the provisions of this standard.
Chemical Composition All pyrotechnic and explosive composition contained in a fireworks device. Inert materials such as clay used for plugs, or organic matter such as rice hulls used for density control are not considered to be chemical composition.

* 2.6

* 2.6.1 Explosive Composition Any chemical compound or mixture, the primary purpose of which is to h c t i o n by explosion, producing an audible effect (report) in a fireworks device. * 2.6.2 Pyrotechnic Composition A chemical mixture which on burning, and without explosion, produces visible or brilliant displays or bright lights, or whistles or motion. * 2.7 Fireworks Any device, other than a novelty or theatrical pyrotechnic article, intended to produce visible andlor audible effects by combustion, deflagration, or detonation. Fireworks are firher described as Fireworks UN0336 (formerly Common Fireworks and now referred to in this Standard as Consumer Fireworks,) or Fireworks UN0335 (formerly Special Fireworks and now referred to in this Standard as Display Fireworks.) Fireworks may also be described as Fireworks UN0337 if examination and testing in accordance with Title 49 CFR, 5 173.56 is performed that warrants that classification.
Note: Propelling and expelling charges consisting of a mixture of sulfbr, charcoal, and potassium nitrate (saltpeter) or similar pyrotechnic compositions not containing metal powders are not considered as designed to produce audible effects.

* 2.7.1 Consumer Fireworks (formerly Common Fireworks) Any fireworks device in a finished state, exclusive of mere ornamentation, suitable for use by the public that complies with the construction, perfbrmance, composition, and labeling requirements promulgated by CPSC in Title 16, CFR, in addition to any limits and other requirements of this Standard. (See Chapter 3 for details.)

M A , STANDARD 87-1

* 2.7.2 Display Fireworks (formerly Special Fireworks)
Fireworks devices in a finished state, exclusive of mere ornamentation, primarily intended for commercial displays which are designed to produce visible andor audible effects by combustion, deflagration or detonation, including, but not limited to: salutes containing more than 130 mg (2 grains) of explosive composition; aerial shells containing more than 40 g of chemical composition exclusive of lift charge; and other exhibition display items that exceed the limits contained in this Standard for consumer fireworks. Certain devices intended for signaling, illuminating, and incendiary purposes and formerly classed, as Special Fireworks no longer fall into this fireworks category. (See Chapter 4 for details.)

* 2.8 Electric Match (Igniter) A device used for the electrical ignition of fireworks and pyrotechnic articles that contains a small amount of pyrotechnic material that ignites when a specified electric current flows through the leads.
* 2.9 Labeling A display of written, printed, or graphic matter upon a fireworks device
andlor upon the immediate package of any such device(s). Included are diamond-shaped labels required by DOT to be displayed on outside packaging for transportation purposes. The term also includes any identification, cautions, and other information required by this Standard or by any federal government agency.

* 2.10 Lift Charge Pyrotechnic composition used to propel a component of a mine or
shell device into the air. Lift charge is limited to black powder (potassium nitrate, sulfur, and charcoal) or similar pyrotechnic composition without metallic fuel.

* 2.11 Marking. The application of the proper shipping name, identification number (UN number), instructions, cautions, weight, or specification mark or combination thereof to a package of hazardous material. Marking also includes any required specification mark on a shipping package.
A device containing small amounts of pyrotechnic andlor explosive composition. Such devices produce limited visible or audible effects. These items must be

* 2.12 Novelty

approved by DOT, and are normally classed as 1.4G. A different classification may be assigned based on testing and examination as specified in me 49 CFR tjCF'R, fj 173.56. Certain novelties which meet the criteria specified in Section 3.2 are not regulated as explosives, and approval by DOT is not required for those specific items.

* 2.13 Placard A warning symbol of a square-on-point configuration mounted on each side and each end of a truck, rail car or fieight container which informs the public and emergency personnel of the hazardous nature of the cargo, as specified in Title 49 CFR fjCFR, f j 172. * 2.14 Quickmatch (Instantaneous Fuse) Black match that is encased in a loose-fitting paper or plastic sheath to make it bum extremely rapidly. Quickrnatch is used for aerial shells and for simultaneous ignition of a number of pyrotechnic devices, such as lances in a ground display piece. Quickrnatch may be approved under the provisions of this Standard and classed as 1.3G, described as Fuse, non- detonating, and assigned identification number UNO101. A different classification may be recommended based on testing and examination as specified in Title 49 CFR, f j 173.56.

APA, STANDARD 87-1 * 2.15 Safety Fuse A h s e consisting of a thread-wrapped black powder train that has been nn coated with a water resistant material. Such fise is typically 3/32 inches (2.4 rr) in outside diameter and frequently green in color. Safety Fuse is described as Fuse, Safety UN0105 and classed as 1.4s.
A pressed or consolidated pellet of pyrotechnic composition that is usually cylindrical, spherical, or rectangular in shape. Stars are fired fiom a launch tube by means of a propelling charge of black powder in roman candles and mines, or they are a component of an insert that is fired into the air in an aerial shell. Stars produce a visible display of color and light as they bum in the air, and sometimes a crackling or similar audible effect is also produced. Stars are typically 0.375-1.0 inch in diameter. Larger cylindrical stars are known as comets. A star is not considered a finished firework, and stars cannot be approved for transportation under the provisions of this Standard.

* 2.16 Star

* 2.17 Theatrical Pyrotechnics Pyrotechnic devices for professional use in the entertainment industry similar to consumer fireworks in chemical composition and construction but not intended for consumer use. Such articles, meeting the lift and effect powder weight limits for similar consumer fireworks but not labeled as such, and containing only chemicals listed in table 4.3-1 may be approved under the provisions of this Standard and classified as Articles, Pyrotechnic, 1.4G, UN043 1.
Note: Theatrical pyrotechnic devices may be classed by DOT as Articles, Pyrotechnic, 1.4S, UN0432 or as Articles, Pyrotechnic, 1.3G, UN0430 on the basis of examination and testing as specified in Title 49 CFR, $ 173.56. 3. REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSUMER =WORKS, THEATRICAL PYROTECHNICS NOVELTIES AND

Note 1: Devices in this category, formerly classed as Class C Explosive, Common Fireworks, are now classed as Fireworks 1.4G under the UN System, and referred to in this Standard as Consumer Fireworks. Note 2 Devices intended for non-consumer use in the entertainment industry, termed : Theatrical Pyrotechnics in this Standard, that meet the chemical composition weight requirements of this chapter may be classed as 1.4G and described as Articles, Pyrotechnic UN043 1 under the provisions of this Standard, but are not required to comply with the fise, construction, and labeling requirements of CPSC for consumer fireworks. Theatrical Pyrotechnics may or may not have an ignition device attached.

* 3.1 Types of Consumer Fireworks The following fireworks devices are subject to the requirements of chapter 3 of this Standard. (See Appendix A for diagrams.) * 3.1.1 Ground and Hand-held Sparkling Devices f'SparklersV) These devices are ground-based or hand-held devices that produce a shower of white, gold, or colored sparks as their primaw pyrotechnic effect. Additional effects may include a colored flame, an audible crackling effect, an audible whistle effect, and smoke. These devices do not rise into the air, do not fire inserts or proiectiles into the air, and do not explode or produce a report (a mild audible crackling-type effect is not

APA, STANDARD 87-1 considered to be a report.) Ground-based or hand-held devices that produce a cloud of smoke as their sole pyrotechnic effect are also included in this category. Types of devices in this category include:

* 3.1.1.1 Cylindrical Pountain Cylindrical tube containing not more than 75 g of pyrotechnic composition. Upon ignition, a shower of colored sparks, and sometimes a whistling effect or smoke, is produced. This device may be provided with a spike for insertion into the ground (Spike Fountain), a wood or plastic base for plac&g on the ground (J3ase Fountain), or a wood or cardboard handle to be hand held (Handle Fountain). When more than 1 tube is mounted on a common base, total pyrotechnic composition may not exceed 200 g. (See section 3.5 for exceptions.) * 3.1.1.2 Cone Pountain Cardboard or heavy paper cone containing not more than 50 g of pyrotechnic composition. The effect is the same as that of a cylindrical fountain. When more than 1 cone is mounted on a common base, total pyrotechnic composition may not exceed 200 g. (See section 3.5 for exceptions.)
Cylindrical tube containing not more than 100 g of pyrotechnic composition that produces a colored flame upon ignition. May be spike, base, or hand held. When more than 1 tube is mounted on a common base, total pyrotechnic composition may not exceed 200 g. (See section 3.5 for exceptions.)

* 3.1.13 Illuminating Torch

* 3.1.1.4 Wheel Pyrotechnic device intended to be attached to a post or tree by means of a nail or string. May have one or more drivers, each of which may contain not more than 60 g of pyrotechnic composition. No wheel may contain more than 200 g total pyrotechnic composition. Upon ignition, the wheel revolves, producing a shower of color and sparks and, sometimes, a whistling effect. * 3.1.1.5 Ground Spinner Small device containing not more than 20 g of pyrotechnic composition, venting out an orifice usually on the side of the tube. Similar in operation to a wheel but intended to be placed flat on the ground and ignited. A shower of sparks and color is produced by the rapidly spinning device. * 3.1.1.6 Flitter Sparkler Narrow paper tube attached to a stick or wire and filled with not more than 5 g of pyrotechnic composition that produces color and sparks upon ignition. The paper at one end of the tube is ignited to make the device bction. * 3.1.1.7 Toy Smoke Device Small plastic or paper item containing not more than 100 g of pyrotechnic composition that, upon ignition, produces white or colored smoke as the primary effect. (For devices containing less than 5 g of pyrotechnic composition, see Section 3.2, Novelties.) Toy smoke devices, when complying with the provisions of this section, are classed as Fireworks, 1.4G unless classed as 1.4s or not regulated as an explosive on the basis of examination and testing as specified in Title 49 CFR, tj 173.56. * 3.1.1.8 Wire SparklerIDipped Stick These devices consist of a metal wire or wood dowel that has been coated with pyrotechnic composition. Upon ignition of the tip of the device, a shower of sparks is produced. Sparklers may contain up to 100 g of pyrotechnic composition per item. Certain wire sparklen and dipped sticks are
5

APA, STANDARD 87-1 considered as Novelties under this Standard, see Section 32 ..

* 3.1.2

Aerial Devices

Sky Rockets and Bottle Rockets Cylindrical tube containing not more than 20 g of chemical composition with a wooden stick attached for guidance and stability. Rockets rise into the air upon ignition. A burst of color andlor sound may be produced at or near the height of fight.

* 3.1.2.1

* 3 1 2 2 Missile-Type Rocket A device similar to a sky rocket in size, composition, ... and effect that uses fins rather than a stick for guidance and stability. Missiles shall contain not more than 20 g of total chemical composition. * 3123 Helicopter, Aerial Spinner A tube containing not more than 20 g of chemical ...
composition, with a propeller or blade attached. Upon ignition the rapidly spinning device rises into the air. A visible or audible effect may be produced at or near the height of flight.

* 3 1 2 4 Roman Candle Heavy paper or cardboard tube containing not more than 20 g ... of chemical cor@osition. Upon ignition, stars (see section 2.14) are individually expelled. * 3 1 2 5 Mine and Shell Devices Heavy cardboard or paper tube usually attached to ... a wooden or plastic base and containing not more than 60 g of total chemical composition (lift charge, burst charge, and visible/audible effect composition.) Upon ignition stars, components producing reports containing up to 130 mg of explosive composition per report, or other devices are propelled into the air. The term mine refers to a device with no internal components containing a bursting charge, and the term shell refers to a device that propels a component that subsequently bursts open in the air. A mine o r shell device may contain more than 1 tube provided the tubes fire in sequence upon ignition of 1 external fuse. The term cake refers to a dense-packed collection of minelshell tubes. Total chemical composition including lift charges of any multiple tube devices may not exceed 200 g. (See section 3.5) The maximum quantity of l i i charpre in any one tube of a mine o r shell device shall not exceed 20 g, and the maximum quantity of break or bursting charge in any component shall not exceed 25% of the total weight of chemical composition in the component.
Note: Shells that are offered for transportation without a launching tube may not be approved as Fireworks, 1.46, UN0336 under the provisions of this Standard, except as provided in section 3 1 2 6 for kits. Aerial shells without ... launching tubes may be approved for transportation as Fireworks, 1.36, UN0335. [See section 4 1 1 ..)

* 3 1 2 6 Aerial Shell Kit, Reloadable Tube A package (kit) containing a cardboard, ... high-density polyethylene (HDPE), or equivalent launching tube and not more than small aerial shells. (see 4.1.1) Each aerial shell is limited to a maximum of 60 g of total chemical composition (lift charge, burst charge, and visiblelaudible effect compositionJ and the maximum diameter of each shell shall not exceed 1.75 inches. @ addition, the maximum quantity of lift charpre in anv shell shall not exceed 20 g,
6

APA, STANDARD 87-1 and the maximum quantity of break or bursting charge in any shell shall not exceed 25% of the total weight of chemical composition in the shell. The total chemical composition of all the shells in a kit, including lift charge, shall not exceed 400 g for approval under the provisions of this Standard. The user lowers a shell into the launching tube, at the time of firing, with the h e extending out of the top of the tube. M e r firing, the tube is then reloaded with another shell for the next firing. 4 launching tubes must be capable of firing twice the number of shells in the kit without failure of the tube. Each package of 12 shells must comply with all warning label requirements of CPSC.

* 3.1.3 Audible Ground Devices * 3.1.3.1 Firecracker Small, paper-wrapped or cardboard tube containing not more
than 50 mg of explosive composition, those used in aerial devices may contain not more than 130 mg of explosive composition per report. Upon ignition, noise and a flash of light are produced. Note: Firecrackers are not subject to the requirements of fuse in section 3.5.1 and chemicals in section 3.6.1.

* 3.1.3.2 Chaser Paper or cardboard tube venting out the fuse end of the tube containing not more than 20 g of chemical composition. The device travels along the ground upon ignition. A whistling effect, or other noise, is often produced. Explosive composition may be included to produce a report but may not exceed 50 mg. * 3.2 Novelties The following devices do not require approval from DOT and are not regulated as explosives under the provisions of this Standard, provided that they are manufactured and packaged as described below. Any devices not complying with the requirements set forth in this section require approval from DOT, and are classed as Fireworks 1.46 and described as Fireworks, UN0336 unless they are classed as 1.4s or not regulated as hazardous materials based on examination and testing as specified in Title 49 CFR, 4 173.56. Devices described in this section which are not regulated as explosives are not considered to be consumer fireworks; however, these devices must stiU comply with all labeling requirements of CPSC applicable to consumer fireworks devices. Novelties must be packaged in strong outer packagings that are sealed to prevent leakage of the contents. Each package, and overpack if used, offered for surface transportation must be plainly marked NOVELTIES, NOT REGULATED, TRANSPORTED BY AIR, I N CONFORMANCE WITH APA EXCEPT N STANDARD 87-1. If novelties are transported by aircraft, they must be classed, labeled, and described as Flammable Solid, Inorganic, n.0.s (Novelties), UN3178.

* 3.2.1 Party Popper Small devices with paper or plastic exteriors that are
actuated by means of friction (a string or t r i c ~ e is typically pulled to actuate the r device.) They frequently resemble champagne bottles or toy pistols in shape. Upon activation, the device expels flame-resistant paper streamers, confetti, or other novelties and produces a small report. Devices may contain not more than 16 mg (0.25 grains) of explosive composition, which is limited to potassium chlorate and red phosphorus. These devices must be packaged in an inner

APA, STANDARD 87-1
packaging which contains a maximum of 72 devices.

* 3 2 2 Snapper Small, paper-wrapped devices containing not more than 10 mg .. . of silver fulminate coated on small bits of sand or gravel When dropped, the device explodes, producing a small report. Snappers must be in inner packages not to exceed 50 devices each, and the inner packages must contain sawdust or a similar, impact-absorbing material. * 3 2 3 Tog Smoke Devices Small devices consisting of cork-like spheres, or .. cardboard or plastic tubes, containing not more than 5 g of pyrotechnic composition that produces a small cloud of smoke after activation. The devices are typically ignited by means of safety fuse. The outer configuration is usually a sphere (smoke ball), cylindrical tube, or paper cone. The chemical composition for white smoke consists of potassium nitrate and sulfur, while colored smokes are produced by mixtures consisting of potassium chlorate, sulfur or sugar, and a sublimable organic dye. Mixtures containing potassium chlorate must also contain a neutralizer/coolant such as sodium bicarbonate. To be eligible for not re~ulatedstatus, these devices must produce smoke as their sole pyrotechnic effect following ignition, and must be packaged in inner units containing a maximum of 72 devices.
Snakes, Glow Worms Pressed pellets of pyrotechnic composition that contain 2 g or less of composition .per article. Upon burning, they produce a snake-like ash that expands in length as the pellet burns. Chemical compositions vary, but typically contain ammonium perchlorate, nitrated pitch, asphaltum, and similar carbonaceous materials. These devices are limited to a maximum of 25 pellets per inner package in order to be transported as not regulated devices.

* 3.2.4

* 3 2 5 Wire Sparklers, Dipped Sticks These devices consist of a metal wire or .. wood dowel that has been coated with pyrotechnic composition. Upon ignition of the tip of the device, a shower of sparks is produced. Sparklers may contain up to 100 g of composition per item. Sparklers typically use barium nitrate as the oxidizer, with aluminum and dextrine as fuels. Iron filings produce the spark effect. Color-producing sparklers use potassium perchlorate as an oxidizer. Any sparkler containing a chlorate or perchlorate oxidizer is limited to a maximum of 5 g of composition per article. Sparklers must be packaged in inner packagings that contain 8 devices or less to be transported as not regulated devices. * 33 Toy Caps Toy plastic or paper caps for toy pistols in sheets, strips, rolls, or individual .
caps, containing not more than an average of 0.25 grains (16 mg) of explosive composition per cap. Toy caps are described as Toy Caps NA0337 and classed as 1.4s. Toy caps shall only be approved for transportation using the procedure specified in Title 49 CFR, 5 173.56(b).

* 3.4 Other Devices The Approvals Branch at DOT should be contacted regarding the requirements and procedures for approval of any device that is a unique shape or design, or any device that produces unique pyrotechnic or explosive effects, or combinations of effects not enumerated in Chapter 3 of this Standard.

APA, STANDARD 87-1

* 3.5 Multiple Tube Fireworks Devices and Pyrotechnic Articles * 3.5.1 Multiple tube devices contain more than one cardboard tube. The ignition of one external h e causes all of the tubes to function in sequence. The tubes are either individually attached to a wood or plastic base, or are dense-packed and are held together by glue, wire, string, or other means that securely holds the tubes together during operation. * 3.5.2 Multiple tube devices are normally limited to a maximum of 200 g of total pyrotechnic composition for approval as Fireworks, UN0336, 1.4G or Article, Pyrotechnic, UN043 1, 1.4G under this Standard. (See 3.5.4 for exceptions.) The weight of chemical composition per tube is limited to the weight limit for the specific type of device in the tube. (See section 3.1 for the weight limits per tube, based on type of effect.) * 3.5.3 The connecting fuses on multiple tube devices must be fused in sequence so that the tubes fire sequentially rather than all at once. * 3.5.4 When the tubes are securely attached to a wood or plastic base, and the tubes
are separated from each other on the base by a distance of at least 0.50 inch (12.7 mrn), a maximum total weight of 500 g of pyrotechnic composition shall be permitted for approval as 1.4G.

* 3.6 Specific Requirements for Consumer Fireworks * 3.6.1 Fuse * 3.6.1.1 Only safety hse or other hse that has been protected to resist side ignition
may be used in consumer fireworks devices subject to the requirements of this standard.

Note: See Appendix B for method of measuring resistance to side ignition. Devices, such as ground spinners, that require a restricted orifice for proper functioning and that contain less than 6 g of pyrotechnic composition, are not subject to the requirements of 3.6.1.1.

* 3.6.1.2 The fuse must be of sufficient length to bum at least 3 seconds but not more than 9 seconds before ignition of the device. The hse for roman candles or similar devices requiring a longer hse for safe functioning may bum up to 12 seconds before ignition of the device. * 3.6.1.3 The fuse must be securely attached so that it will support either the weight of the device plus 8 ounces (227 g) of dead weight or double the weight of the device, whichever is less, without separation from the fireworks device. * 3.6.1.4 The fuse on multiple tube devices must be hsed in sequence between individual tubes. * 3.6.2 Construction

APA, STANDARD 87-1 * 3.6.2.1 Bases Each fireworks device that requires a base shall utilize a base of wood or plastic (preferably non-brittle, medium impact polystyrene.) The minimum horizontal dimension or the diameter of the base must be equal to at least ? the height of the device (excluding any protruding fuse,) unless the device remains upright when subjected to a tilt of 12" fiom the horizontal. Bases shall remain firmly attached to the item during transportation, handling and normal operation. (See Appendix B for method of measuring.) Note: Multiple tube mine and shell devices which contain at least one launching tube with an inner diameter of 1.5 inches or greater must be stable when placed on a test fixture that holds the device at a 60' angle. This is a static test, the fireworks device is not ignited while at a 60' angle.

* 3.6.2.2 Sticks The stick on a rocket (sky rockets and bottle rockets,) and on other fireworks devices that utilize a stick, shall be firmly attached to the body of the device by means of glue, staples, or wire. Sticks must be secure enough to remain firmly attached during transportation, handling, and normal operation. Sticks shall be rigid and of such length so as to assure stable flight. The maximum curvature of such stick(s) may not exceed 1 inch (25 mm.) (See Appendix B for method of testing rigidity.) * 3.6.2.3 Handles Each fireworks device which is intended to be hand-held, and is so labeled, must incorporate a handle at least 4 inches (101 mm) in length. Handles must remain firmly attached during transportation, handling, and normal operation of the device. Or, must consist of an integral section of the device which extends at least 4 inches (101 mm) below the pyrotechnic chamber. Sparklers 10 inches (253 mm) or less in length shall have handles at least 3 inches (76 mm) in length.
Spikes which constitute an integral part of a fireworks device shall protrude at least 2 inches (5 1 mm) fiom the base of the device and shall have a blunt tip not less than 118 inch (3.2 mm) in diameter or 118 inch (3.2 mm) square.

* 3.6.2.4 Spikes

* 3.6.2.5 Pyrotechnic Chamber The pyrotechnic chamber in a fireworks device that hctions other than by exploding must be of sufficient thickness and rigidity to allow normal functioning of the device without burnout or blowout. The chamber must also be constructed and sealed to prevent leakage of the pyrotechnic composition during transportation, handling, and normal operation. * 3.6.2.6 W i g s W i g s on helicopter-type rockets and similar devices must be securely attached to the body by means of gluing, wiring, or other appropriate means so that they will remain firmly attached during transportation, handling, and normal operation. * 3.6.2.7 Wheel Devices Each wheel device must be constructed so that the driver(s), motor(s), and axle(s), when needed (i.e., on wheel devices intended to operate in a fvred location) remain securely attached to the device during transportation, handling, and normal operation. * 3.6.2.8 Aerial Devices Each device intended to produce a visible or audible effect high in the air must be designed to produce the effect at or near the apex of its flight.

APA, STANDARD 87-1

* 3.6.2.9 Smoke Devices Each smoke device must be constructed so that it will neither burst nor produce excessive flame (excluding h e and small but brief bursts of flame accompanying normal smoke production.) Smoke devices may not contain plastic in direct contact with the pyrotechnic composition, nor may smoke devices resemble, in color and configuration, banned fireworks devices, such as M-80 salutes, cherry bombs, or silver salutes. * 3.7 Prohibited Chemicals and Components * 3.7.1 Prohibited Chemicals Consumer fireworks devices offered or intended for sale to the public may not contain a chemical enumerated in table 3.7-1, except for small amounts (less than 0.25% by weight) as impurities, and except as specified therein.
Note: Display fireworks and theatrical pyrotechnics (See section 2.15) are not subject to the provisions of this section.

* TABLE 3.7-1 Prohibited Chemicals for Consumer Fireworks
1. Arsenic sulfide, arsenates, or arsenites 2. Boron 3. Chlorates, except: a. In colored smoke mixtures in which an equal or greater weight of sodium bicarbonate is included b. In party poppers c. In those small items (such as ground spinners) wherein the total powder content does not exceed 4 g of which not greater than 15% (or 600 mg) is potassium, sodium, or barium chlorate d. In firecrackers e. In toy caps 4. Gallates or gallic acid 5. Magnesium (magnesiurdaluminum alloys, called magnalium, are permitted) 6. Mercury salts 7. Phosphorus (red or white) (red phosphorus is permissible in caps and party poppers) 8. Picrates or picric acid 9. Thiocyanates 10. Titanium, except in particle size that does not pass through a 100-mesh sieve 11. zirconium 12. Lead tetroxide (red lead oxide) and other lead compounds

* 3.7.2 Prohibited Components

No component of any consumer fireworks device or novelty, may upon functioning, project or disperse any metal, glass, or brittle plastic hgtnents.

* 3.7.3 Forbidden Devices

Any device intended for sale to the public that produces an audible effect (other than a whistle) by a charge of more than 130 mg (2 grains) of explosive composition per report. Devices obtained for bona-Jide pest control purposes in accordance with regulations promulgated by CPSC in Title

APA, STANDARD 87-1 16, CFR are not forbidden if approved in accordance with Title 49 CFR, 173.56.

5

Note: For transportation purposes the term, forbidden devices, may also include mixtures or devices that contain a chlorate and an ammonium salt, or an acidic metal, salt. Or, devices that contain yellow or white phosphorus, devices that combine an explosive and a detonator or blasting cap. And, any device that has not been approved by DOT.

* 3.8

Specific Requirements for Theatrical Pyrotechnics

* 3.8.1 Theatrical pyrotechnics that are approved as UN0431, Articles, Pyrotechnic,
1.4G shall not bear a warning label that resembles the required wording on a consumer fireworks device. A warning label providing instructions to a trained operator is permitted, but alternative wording must be used.

* 3.8.2 Theatrical pyrotechnics may or may not have an ignition device attached. * 3.8.3 All requests for approval of a device as Articles, Pyrotechnic shall be accompanied by a signed certification stating that the article is intended for professional use in the entertainment industry and will not be offered for sale to the general public. * 3.8.9 Approvals for classification as Articles, Pyrotechnic shall be evaluated based on the weight of pyrotechnic composition in the individual article, and compared to the allowable weights for the corresponding category of 1.4G consumer fireworks. If a 1.4G classification is desired for an article containing more pyrotechnic composition than is permitted for a comparable consumer firework, the DOT approval procedure in Title 49 CFR, 5 173.56(b)(l) shall be followed. * 3.9 Approval. All consumer fireworks (Fireworks, UN0336,) novelties and theatrical
pyrotechnics offered for transportation in the United States shall be classified and approved for transportation purposes by DOT, in accordance with the following procedure: *3.9.1 Fireworks and novelties containing mixtures of chemicals specified in table 4.3-1, but none of the chemicals prohibited by section 3.7. For each item in which approval is sought, manufacturers shall submit a copy of an approval application (see Appendix D) to DOT. DOT may issue an approval for the device as 1.4G based on the information contained in the form or, at its option, may require laboratory examination by a person approved by DOT to examine explosives.

* 3.9.2 Fireworks and novelties containing any chemical not specified in table 4.3-1, but
none of the chemicals prohibited by section 3.7. For each item in which approval is sought, the manufacturer shall obtain a report fiom a person approved by DOT to examine explosives or, obtain a test report fiom a recognized competent authority (for fireworks manufactured abroad.) The manufacturer shall then submit an approval application (see appendix D) together with the appropriate examination reports to DOT. DOT may then issue approval based on the information contained in the application and accompanying laboratory reports, or may require additional information.

APA, STANDARD 87-1

* 3.9.3 Theatrical pyrotechnics containing only mixtures of chemicals specified in table
4.3-1. For each item in which approval is sought, manufacturers shall submit a copy of an approval application (see appendix D) to DOT. DOT may issue an approval for the device as 1.4G based on the information contained in the form. Or, at DOT'S discretion, may require a report fiom a person approved by DOT to examine explosives or may require a test report fiom a recognized competent authority (for articles manufactured abroad.)

* 3.9.4 Theatrical pyrotechnics containing any chemical not specified in table 4.3-1. For
each item in which approval is sought, the manufacturer shall obtain a report fiom a person approved by DOT to examine explosives or obtain a test report fiom a recognized competent authority (for articles manufactured abroad.) The manufacturer shall then submit an approval application (see Appendix D) together with the appropriate laboratory reports to DOT. DOT may then issue an approval based on the information contained in the application and accompanying laboratory reports.

* 3.9.5 If classification other than 1.4G is sought, the DOT approval procedure in Title 49 CFR, 5 173.56(b)(l) must be followed. This includes obtaining a laboratory report fiom a person approved by DOT to examine explosives. * 3.10 Marking and Labeling Fireworks intended for consumer sale and use shall be
labeled in conformance with the requirements of the Federal Hazardous Substances Act (FHSA) and regulations promulgated thereunder in Title16 CFR, 5 1500. All outside packaging containing fireworks must be marked and labeled in conformance with Title 49 CFR, 5 172. (See appendix C and chapter 5 for details and examples.)

4.

REQUIREMENTS FOR DISPLAY FIREWORKS DEVICES Note: Devices in this category, formerly classed as Class B Explosives, Special Fireworks, are now classed as 1.3G, under the UN system and referred to as display fireworks.

* 4.1 Types of Display Fireworks Devices. The following fireworks devices are subject
to the requirements of chapter 4:

*4.1.1 Aerial Shell A cylindrical or spherical cartridge containing lift charge, burst charge and effect composition.) Shells are most commonly 2 inches (50 mm) to 6 inches (152mm) in diameter, and are fired fiom metal, highdensity polyethylene (HDPE), fiberglass, or heavy cardboard tubes. Upon firing, the lift charge is consumed and the cartridge is expelled into the air. A pyrotechnic effect is produced neat the apex of flight. Aerial shells are typically ignited by means of a quickmatch hse or electric match. Burst charge used in aerial shells is limited to black powder (potassium nitrate, sulfur, and charcoal) or similar pyrotechnic composition may not be approved under the provisions of this Standard as 1 3 6 articles. Aerial shells exceeding 10 inches (250 mm) in diameter or containing a burst charge that has metallic fuel may be appkved under this Standard as Fireworks, UN0333,l.lG.

-

APA, STANDARD 87-1 Note: Al aerial shells that are not contained in a launch tube (section 3.1.2.5) or l sold as part of a reloadable shell kit (section 3.1.2.6) may only be approved under the provisions of this Standard as Fireworks, UN0335,1.3G.

* 4.1.2 Salute Paper-wrapped, cardboard tube, or sphere containing explosive composition in excess of 130 mg (2 grains.) Upon ignition, noise and a flash of light are produced. The maximum quantity of explosive composition in a salute shell, or in a salute component of a multi-effect shell, shall not exceed 2.5 oz (71 g) for approval under this Standard as a 1.3G article. Salutes or articles with salute components containing more than 2.5 oz (71d of explosive composition per salute or per component may be approved under this Standard as Fireworks, UN0333 1.1G. * 4.1.3 Other Fireworks Devices * 4.1.3.1 When the quantity of explosive andlor pyrotechnic composition exceeds the limit
for inclusion in the Fireworks, UN0336 category, devices enumerated in section 3.1 are classed as 1.3G and described as Fireworks, UN0335 (formerly described as Fireworks, Special and classed as Class B Explosives.) This includes multiple tube devices containing more than 200 g of total chemical composition, except as otherwise specified in section'3.5.

* 4.1.3.2 Certain devices intended for signaling, illuminating, and incendiary purposes such as: railway torpedoes; airplane flares; illuminating projectiles; incendiary and smoke projectiles; as well as flash cartridges (formerly classed as special fireworks,) no longer fall into the fireworks category under DOT regulations effective on 10/1/91 and are not part of this Standard. * 4.2
Construction of Aerial Shells

* 4.2.1

Each shell shall be identified only in terms of the inside diameter (not the circumference) of the mortar in which it can be safely used (e.g., 3 inches (76mm) shells are only for use in 3 inch (76mm) mortars.)

* 4.2.2 Each shell shall be constructed so that the difference between the inside diameter of the mortar in which it can be safely used and the outside diameter of the shell is not less than ? inch (3.2mm) and not more than % inch (6.4mm) for shells not exceeding 3 inches (76mm) or % inch (12.7mm) for shells larger than 3 inches (76mm.) * 4.2.3 Each shell must be labeled with the type of shell, the diameter measurement, and
the name of the manufacturer or distributor.

* 4.2.4 The length of the internal delay fUse and the amount of lift charge must be sized to
insure proper hctioning of the shell in its mortar. Quickmatch hse, if required, must be long enough to allow not less than 6 inches (152mm) of k e to protrude fiom the mortar after the shell is properly inserted. * 4.2.5 The length of exposed black match on a shell, if required, may not be less than 3 inches (76mm) and the h s e shall not be folded or doubled back under the safety cap. Also, the time delay between ignition of the tip of the exposed black match and ignition of

APA, STANDARD 87-1 the lift charge may not be less than 3 seconds to allow the operator to retreat safely.

* 4.2.6

A safety cap shall be installed over the exposed end of the h e , if ignition hse is present. The safety cap must be of a different color than that used for the paper of the hse.

* 4.2.7 If an electric match is attached to an aerial shell or other display firework prior to
transportation, the requirements in section 5.8 must be complied with.
*4.3

Approval Prior to being offered for transportation in the United States all display fireworks (Fireworks, 1.3G) must be classified and approved by DOT in accordance with the following procedures:
4.3.1 Devices containing only mixtures of chemicals specified in table 4.3-1. The manufacturer shall submit a copy of an approval application (see appendix D) to DOT for any item that has not previously been approved by DOT. DOT may issue an approval for the device based on the information contained in the form. Or, at its discretion, may require examination by a person approved by DOT to examine explosives, or may accept a test report fiom a recognized competent authority (for fireworks manufactured abroad.)

*

* 4.3.2 Devices containing any chemical not specified in table 4.3-1. For each item in
which approval is sought, the manufacturer shall submit a sample of each pyrotechnic mixture that contains any chemical not specified in table 4.3-1 to a person approved by DOT to examine explosives. Or, the applicant may obtain a test report fiom a recognized competent authority (for fireworks manufactured abroad.) The manufiidurer shall then submit an approval application (see appendix D), together with the appropriate laboratory reports to DOT. DOT may then issue approval based on the information contained in the application and accompanying laboratory report(s).

APA, STANDARD 87-1

not to exceed 5% of formulation

Sodium Salts (except Sodium Chlorate) Sodium Sulphate Strontium Carbonate Strontium Nitrate Strontium Sulfate Sulfur Titanium (particle size must not pass through 100 mesh sieve if 1.4G or 1.4s Fireworks)

Color Agent Oxygen Donor Color Agent Oxygen Donor Oxygen Donor Fuel Fuel

APA, STANDARD 87-1 Miscellaneous Compounds : Organic compounds may be compounds such as: lactose; shellac; red gum; chlorinated paraffin; and polyvinyl chloride that consist of some combination of carbon with hydrogen, oxygen and/or chlorine. Nitrogen may be present if it accounts for less than 10% (by weight) of the compound. Nitrocellulose with not more than 12.6% nitrogen by mass, that meets the criteria for classification as a 4.1 flammable solid, is permitted as a propelling or expelling charge provided there is less than 15 g of nitrocellulose per article. Note: Exact chemical identity of each organic compound must be included when submitting an approval application (appendix D) to DOT.

* 4.4 Approval for Combination Devices for Display Purposes When two or more articles of consumer or display fireworks, or theatrical pyrotechnics (already approved by DOT) are combined to form one unit, a separate approval for the combination device is not required if all of the following conditions are met: * 4.4.1 The combination device is to be used for display or entertainment purposes, but is not intended for consumer use. * 4.4.2 The combination device is constructed fiom approved lireworks, novelties, and theatrical pyrotechnics. * 4.4.3 * 4.4.4 * 4.4.5
The combination device is transported by private carrier.

The assembled unit is transported using the EX numbers for the individual components.

If all components of the combination device have been approved as 1.4G articles, the combination item is classed as a 1.4G article provided that the total weight of pyrotechnic composition (including lift and effect charges) in the article does not &xed 200 g. (see section 3.5 for exception) The combination device shall be described as UN043 1, Articles; Pyrotechnic, 1.4G if all of the components'are approved as UN043 1. Otherwise, the device shall be described as UN0336, Fireworks, 1.4G.

* 4.4.6 If one or more of the components has been classed as a 1.3G Article, or if the total weight of pyrotechnic composition (including lift and effect charges) is more than 200 g (see section 3.5 for exception), then the assembled unit is classed as a 1.3G Article. The combination device shall be described as UN0430, Articles, Pyrotechnic, 1.3G if all of the components are classed as either CN0430 or CN0431. Otherwise, the device shall be described as UN0335, Fireworks, 1.3G.
5. SHIPPING REQUIREMENTS

* 5.1 Transportation Regulating Authorities Transportation of fireworks is regulated by
DOT. Some states and municipalities also regulate transportation of fireworks through their jurisdiction, often by incorporation of federal regulations.

APA, STANDARD 87-1 * 5.2 Approval Except for samples prepared in accordance with DOT regulations, or unless specifically permitted bv this Standard, no fireworks device or novelty may be offered for transportation or transported until it is classed and approved by DOT, and an approval number (EX number) is issued (Title 49 CFR, 5 173.56.) (see chapters 3-4 and appendix D)

* 5.2.1 EX numbers for fireworks contained in a shipping carton must be marked on the shipping carton or on the shipping paper. * 5.2.2 Cartons containing 5 or more different fireworks devices must be marked with at
ut least 5 of the EX numbers covering items in the carton, or the EX numbers m s appear on the shipping paper. (Title 49 CFR, §172.320(c) and (d))
With certain exceptions, Consumer Fireworks UN0336, Display Fireworks UN0335, Articles Pyrotechnic UN043 1 and Novelties, must be securely packaged in containers complying with DOT regulations Title 49 CFR, 5 178. Gross weight limitation per package is now dictated by the weight marked on the certified packaging. Articles with match or iiiction tip ignition must be packed so that each individual tip is protected against accidental contact or friction. Loose chemical composition may not be present in packages in transportation. (Title 49 CFR, tj 172.102(c), Special Provision (108))

* 5.3 Packaging

* 5.4 Placards Unless otherwise provided, each motor vehicle, fieight container and rail car must bear appropriate placards on each end and each side (Title 49 CFR, 5 172.504 (a).) Vehicles containing packages of consumer fireworks or novelties which are labeled 1.4G require a 1.4G or Explosive 1.4G placard (Title 49 CFR, tj 172.523,) and use of the word explosive is optional (Title 49 CFR, 5 172.519(b)(3),) except highway and rail shipments of less than 1,000 pounds gross weight of such fireworks need not bear a placard (Title 49 CFR, tj 172.504(c).) Vehicles containing display fireworks in any quantity require a 1.3G or Explosive 1.3G placard (Title 49 CFR, tj 172.522) and use of the word explosive is optional (Title 49 CFR, 5 173.5 19(b)(3).) If both 1.4G and 1.3G are present in a shipment, the 1.3G placard is required, and the 1.4G placard is not needed. * 5.5 Package Marking and Labeling Each person who offers fireworks for transportation shall ensure that the package displays the appropriate square-on-point label (Title 49 CFR, 5 172.400(a) and 172.41 1.) Use of the word explosive on the 1.3G and 1.4G labels is not required (Title 49 CFR 5 172.405(a).) Consumer fireworks, toy smoke devices, and trick noisemakers are either classed as 1.4G, 1.4S, or not regulated for transportation purposes. Display fireworks are classed as 1.3G (Title 49 CFR, 5 172.101.) The label must be printed or affied to the surface of the package near the proper shipping name and identification number, which are also required to appear on the package (Title 49 CFR, 5 172.301 (a).) * 5.6 Shipping Papers Each person who offers a fireworks device or novelty for transportation shall describe the item on a shipping paper. The description must include the proper shipping name (see Title 49 CFR 5 172.101, hazardous materials table, col. 2) the hazard class of the material (col. 3,) the identification number (col. 4,) the packing group (col. 5,) and the total quantity covered by the description (Title 49 CFR 5 172.202(a).) Consumer fireworks should be described as follows: Fireworks, 1.4G, UN 0336, PG 11, x lb. or kg. Display fireworks should be described as Fireworks, 1.3G, UN 0335, PG 1 , x Ib. or kg. In 1

APA, STANDARD 87-1 addition, the shipper shall certifj, that the shipment is properly classified, marked and labeled (Title 49 CFR 5 172.204(a).) Note: EX numbers shall also appear on shipping papers unless they are marked on each shipping carton.

* 5.7 Special Packaging Provisions for Transportation in a Motor Vehicle by Private
Carrier
Fireworks articles such as large set pieces, that are too large to be readily placed into fiberboard cartons, shall be permitted to be transported without external packaging to a display site provided that the articles are securely attached to the inside walls of the vehicle by means of wire, wood, or rope and provided that all fuse is protected against accidental ignition by means of a paper covering or paper end cap. All other packages in the vehicle shall be secured to prevent accidental movement and contact with the unpackaged articles.

* 5.7.1

* 5.7.2

Fusees (highway flares) for use in a fireworks display shall be permitted to be transported in a motor vehicle with fireworks, provided that the flares are properly packaged in accordance with Title 49, CFR.

Display fireworks remaining uniired at the conclusion of a display shall be permitted to be repacked in the certified packaging used to bring the fireworks to the display site. The maximum gross weight (printed as part of the box certification marking) authorized for a fiberboard carton shall not be exceeded. The fireworks shall be removed to authorized storage, by means of motor vehicle, as soon as possible following the display.

* 5.7.3

* 5.7.4

Misfired devices that are to be returned fiom the display site to the supplier shall be packed separately fiom unused, unfired devices, and shall be transported only by private motor carrier.

* 5.8 Requirements for an Electric Match (Igniter) Attached to a Display Firework
Prior to Transportation Fireworks with electric matches attached shall only be transported fiom a fireworks manufacturer's or display operator's kility to a fireworks display site, or to an approved storage for subsequent shipment to a display site.

*

5.8.1

The fireworks and the electric matches must be separately approved and assigned EX numbers in accordance with Title 49 CFR, 5 173.56. Report shells (salutes) that exceed 3 inches in diameter or contain more than 70 g (2.5 oz) of salute powder shall not be transported with electric matches attached. All electric matches that are pre-attached to fireworks for transportation must be certified by the manufacturer to be thermally stable at 150' C for 24 hours. All electric matches that are pre-attached to fireworks for transportation shall be rated by the manufacturer to have a no fire current of not less than 0.20 amperes (i.e., the 19

* 5.8.2

* 5.8.3

* 5.8.4

* 5.8.5

APA, STANDARD 87-1

match does not ignite when tested with a current of less than 0.20 amperes.) The electric match shall be securely attached to the h e or to the lift charge so as to prevent significant movement of the igniter. When the electric match is placed directly into the lift charge of a fiework, the electric match shall have a covering (shroud) placed over the match head itself.

* 5.8.6

* 5.8.7

*.5.8.8 The leg wires of the electric match shall be shorted (shunted) at all times during
transportation.
5.8.9 The transportation of any UN0335, Fireworks, 1.3G with attached electric matches by aircraft is prohibited.

*

6.

REFERENCES

* 6.1

Title 49 CFR, 171-180, DOT This document can be found online at www.access.gpo.gov/nardcJ;/waisidx~99/49cf9.html. A hard copy may be purchased fiom: Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402, or as republished by Bureau of Explosives as Hazardous Materials Regulations of the Department of Transportation, Association of American Railroads, 50 F Street, NW, Washington DC 20001.

* 6.2

Title 16 CFR, 5 1000 to End, CPSC This document can be found online at: www.access.gpo.gov/nard~J;/waisidx~OO/l6cfrv2~00.html. A hard copy may be purchased fiom the US GPO (see section 6.1 for address.) Extracts of these regulations pertaining to fireworks only may be purchased fiom the American Pyrotechnics Association.

Stevenson, Todd A.
George Forster [George.Forster@halliburton.com] Thursday, August 10,200610:39 PM Sent: To : Stevenson, Todd A. Subject: FIREWORKS ANPR
From:

Hi I am currently over here in Iraq and I keep hearing that our freedoms are being taken away by our own government the same government that is over here trying to get the Iraqis their freedom.. if the actions of the US government is to take away the simple rights of freedom of by simple chemicals for fireworks then the Iraqis should be very scared that this will happen to them, the US government has no business in what private citizens do on their own time. If the basis of people getting hurt is from 4 people getting killed so what,, how many people killed killed each day by riding a bicycle or riding a lawn mower,, the C P S C is way out of line,, pretty soon the people are going to BE MORE AFRAID of the US GOVERNMENT than what any Terrorist organization will ever threaten to do. It's a simple fact. A country is more powerful or wields more influence when its people control the government, A country is less powerfull when its own people are afraid of its own government.

George Forster Driver Support Logcap Ill DOL Traffic Anaconda,lraq
71 3-445-4103

This e-mail, including any attached files, may contain confidential and privileged information for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution, or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the intended recipient), please contact the sender by reply e-mail and delete all copies of h s message.

OKLAHOMA WAREHOUSE 17824 S. Sooner Rd. Norman, OK 73071 405-321-4886 wcfwrksQsbcglobal.net www.jakesfireworks.com

OFFICE & WAREHOUSE 689 S. Hwy 69 Pittsburg, KS 66762 620-231-2264 Fax: 620-231-2416 wcfwrksQsbcglobal.net www.jakesfireworks.com

TEXAS WAREHOUSE 7010 Hwy 19 S. Athens, TX 75751 903-264-2264 Fax: 903-264-2416 ksboneQ sbcglobal.net www.jakesfireworks.com

SOUTH CAROLINA WAREHOUSE 130 Red River Road PO Box 157 Wagener, SC 29164 803-564-2264 Fax: 803-564-2416
jlawson Qjakesfireworks.net

August 18,2006 Office of the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 502 4330 East-West Highway Bethesda, Maryland 208 14 Re: Fireworks ANPR Dear Sir or Madame: This is in response the Fireworks ANPR posted by CPSC to the Federal Register on July 12, 2006. I have serious reservations for what the ANPR is proposing. Although I support all efforts to strengthen safety and regulation of the fireworks industry, I question the success of a private sector organization steering government regulation and rulemaking. AFSL has performed the tasks of establishing a standard for items and tested product accordingly. The question, however, is who benefits the most from the standards? Is it the consumer, the industry, or the AFSL board? AFSL has been in existence for seventeen years. Since the establishment of the organization, only select companies have had representation on the AFSL Board. There have been numerous incidents over the years when members requested to run for the Board of Directors only to be told that there are too many qualified nominees and that their name will not be allowed on the ballot. It is my contention that AFSL is not a true cross-section of the fireworks industry. The AFSL Board of Directors continually reflects the same companies and philosophies. There is no room on the Board for new people or fresh ideas. This stagnant approach the AFSL has adopted causes me to fear that their intentions may not be completely altruistic. Adopting AFSL Standards as CPSC regulations will place too much power in the hands of a single organization. This shift of power may enable AFSL Board Members to use standards as a vehicle to obtain personal objectives and alienate competitors. In simple terms, you may be having the fox the watch the hen house. I promote safety in our industry. I respect CPSC's desire to establish and enforce rules and regulations that will protect the consumer. I will support CPSC's efforts to encourage a safer product for the US consumer. I cannot, however, condone the use of AFSL's standards being used as a government standard. Historically, AFSL represents only a few elite organizations - and not the industry as a whole. As always, please feel free to contact me with any further questions or comments regarding this matter.
w
V1

G$
2 2
4

DIRECT IMPORTER

DISTRIBUTOR

MANUFACTURER

Best regards,

Co-owner

August 18,2006 Office of the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 502 4330 East-West Highway Bethesda, Maryland 208 14 Re: Fireworks ANPR To Whom It May Concern:

C ~ T C I O F COF THE SECRFilRy FREEDDM OF IHFOZMATIOH

I am writing in response to the Fireworks ANPR posted by CPSC to the Federal Register on July 12,2006. I am concerned with the effectiveness of a private organization steering government regulation and rulemaking. As I do support efforts to brace safety and regulation of the fireworks industry, I do question the judgment of the private organizations solely controlling the government regulations.

Some questions arise from the decision made including who will benefit from these standards? Since the existence of AFSL only a handful of companies have had representation on the Board of Directors. When the Board of Directors is only represented by these select companies the decisions made reflect only those opinions of the represented companies, not the entire membership. With the Board's decision to adopt AFSL Standards as CPSC regulations I am concerned with the amount of power that will be placed with a single organization. The overabundance of power may enable AFSL Board Members to consider only personal objectives and isolate the competitors. I have the up most respect for CPSC's intentions to enforce safety regulations. I support all the measures that are taken to promote a safe product for consumers but I cannot support using AFSL's standards as a government standard while they do not represent the entire fireworks industry. If you have any concerns or questions, please feel free to contact me regarding this matter. Respectfully,

Ben Turner Pacific Northwest

Wild Bill's Fireworks 32 1 Valley Park Dr. Branson, MO 65616

Office of the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 502 4330 East-West Highway Bethesda, Maryland 208 14 Re: Fireworks ANPR To Whom It May Concern: This is in response to the Fireworks ANPR posted by CPSC to the Federal Register on July 12,2006. This would be a bad move for the fireworks industry. I encourage all efforts to maintain the safety and regulation of the fireworks industry, but why is this being considered? Having a self-serving organization control an entire industry is not in the best interests of all consumer fireworks retailers and wholesalers. Since the founding of AFSL, only select companies have had a chance to be heard by the AFSL and its board. They run a club that is only worried about a select few companies and their own interests. I think it would be a mistake to give them the power to regulate the fireworks industry. The AFSL Board of Directors continually reflects the same ideas. Giving them this power may enable AFSL Board Members to use the standards as a tool to run off the competition.

I promote safety in our tents and stands. I support CPSC's desire to establish and enforce rules and regulations that will protect the consumer. I will also support CPSC's efforts to encourage a safer product for the consumer. I cannot, in any way, shape or form, condone the use of AFSL's standards being used as a government standard. Their stance on reloadable artillery shells is a perfect example. They are trying to kill a product that is safer than ones their own rules permit. This would be a mistake for the fireworks industry.
Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me regarding this matter.

w &
Best regards, Noel Braun

Fireworks Supercenter 107 Creek View Ct. Weatherford, TX 76088

August 2 1,2006 Office of the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 502 4330 East-West Highway Bethesda, Maryland 208 14 Re: Fireworks ANPR To Whom It May Concern: This is in response to the Fireworks ANPR posted by CPSC to the Federal Register on July 12, 2006. I am scared of what the ANPR is proposing. I support all efforts to ensure the safety and regulation of the fireworks industry, but I must question the logic of having a private organization controlling government regulation. AFSL has been in existence for seventeen years and since the establishment of the organization, only select companies have had representation on the AFSL and its board. They run a club that is only worried about a select few companies. Having dealt with them on several issues, I think it would be a mistake to give them the power to regulate the fireworks industry. The AFSL Board of Directors continually reflects the same companies. Giving them this power may enable AFSL Board Members to use standards as a tool to more easily obtain their companies objectives and squash the competition. desire to establish and enforce rules I promote safety in our company's outlets. I respect CPSCYs and regulations that will protect the consumer. I have and will support CPSC's efforts to encourage a safer product for the consumer. I cannot, however, condone the use of AFSL's standards being used as a government standard. This would be a mistake for the fireworks industry. Should you need anything, please feel free to contact me with any further questions or comments regarding this matter.

Wholesale Fireworks Enterprises, LLC
1611 W. Ledgerwood Dr Andover, KS 67002

CPSCJOFC OF THE 5ECREfARY' FREE00t.1 OF ItlFOR MATtDN

August 21,2006 Office of the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 502 4330 East-West Highway Bethesda, Maryland 208 14 Re: Fireworks ANPR Commissioners:

2B AU6 28 B

P 2: b5

m I a responding to the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking issued on July 12, 2006 concerning the updates and strengthening of fireworks regulations. As I a a m strong advocate of consumer safety and protection, my primary concern is that any changes to these regulations are in direct pursuit of these goals.
It is the responsibility of the CPSC to research consumer safety issues, to evaluate and review the results of this research and to inevitably determine the proper regulatory actions in order to reach a reasonable level of protection for the consumer. Sounds simple enough when stated like that. Unfortunately, like most tasks in life, is not as easy as it sounds. The task requires a strong commitment, a sense of purpose and a clear focus on a well-defined goal that meets the objectives of the commission. After reading through the ANPR, I had a very unsettling feeling that the commission charged with the task described above would allow itself to be steered into wholesale regulation changes. It further bothered me that this commission would allow a single entity that may or may-not represent a reasonable cross-section of the fireworks industry to gain such a foothold in the commissions direction. Where is the Commissions research and deliberation in the need for further regulation? In this document I see the words "According to AFSL" which indicates to me that the Commission is accepting the opinion of one group as the industry supported opinion without so much as verifying the roots of the source. I am reminded of the small town whose city commission decided that a city manager was needed to relieve the day-to-day burden of city operation for the commissioners. Soon the city manager was making all the decisions for the town and the commissioners had become so out of touch with the worlungs of the city that their vote became a rubber stamp for the city managers whlms.

If the commission decides that there are voids in the current body of regulations, if the commission decides that new regulations are needed to more fully protect consumers, then it must be the commission that leads this change. Please do not allow change to regulations for the sake of the appearance of accomplishment. Please do not allow the influence of a single group to be accepted as the desires of the entire industry. Thank you for your time and please feel fiee to contact me if you wish. Lany Hale Operations Manager

Far East Imports, Inc.
5521 N Main Joplin, MO 64801

CYSCf OFC OF THE SECRETARY FREEDOM OF INFORMATION

August 22,2006 Office of the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 502 4330 East-West Highway Bethesda, Maryland 208 14 Re: Fireworks M Commissioners: It has recently been brought to my attention that the CPSC is considering regulation changes concerning consumer fireworks. As you know, this is a field that is under constant scrutiny by State and local governing bodies, which have many agendas for their concerns. Most of these concerns are focused around property damage, which of course is driven by insurance companies. Your organization is the main protector of humans in this equation. CPSC regulations are designed to assure that the products manufactured or imported into the U.S. meet a level of composition and performance that provides protection for the consumer. The CPSC concerns are based more directly on bodily injury and to a lesser extent propriety damage. As an importer it is CPSC regulations that most effect the portion of the fireworks industry that involves my company. When reading the ANPR on proposed changes I found options on the direction changes could take, but I could not find supporting reason for any change. I am a strong supporter of consumer safety and consumer protection. It pains me every time I hear of a personal injury due to the misuse of a firework, but in the same breath I realize that no activity can ever be completely safe when humans are involved. The APA shows that fireworks usage has soared in the past few years, but the personal injuries pre-capita of usage has declined. I think this fact alone indicates that the CPSC and its current regulations are doing a pretty good job. As for testing, there are many testing facilities that provide comprehensive testing that meet regulations and on a voluntary basis exceed those regulations. The claim by AFSL that their guidelines are the ones that the industry has adopted is absurd. Like any industry the true driver of change is watching your competitor and then utilizing what they do better in your processes. Every tester out there has something they do that sets them apart from the rest in that specific procedure or process. The concept that we call "Best In Practices" in today's lingo.
R

In closing I would like to remind each commissioner that the injury statistics do not reflect some great void in the CPSC regulation or the manner that the fireworks industry is meeting the challenge of safe product development. If it did, I would be the first to write to tell you, but instead it shows that of the most injuries can be attributed to misuse in one way or another. We cannot stop people form making bad decisions (for whatever reason) that lead to injuries, but if there is a gain to be made, I feel that the consumer is the key. I thank you for taking the time to review my comments and I hope that if nothing else I have given you proof that there are more voices out here then the voice of the AFSL. Jake Marietta President Far East Imports, Inc.

From:
Sent:
To :

John MacLennan [macselec@comcast.net] Monday, August 28,2006 3 5 8 PM Stevenson, Todd A.

Subject: Fireworks ANPR

Being an elected city alderman and chair of the City of Prescott's Ordinance Committee I have several questions I would like answered. I read in a document posted by Todd a. Severson, Secretary, CPSC written 7111/06, That there is a CPSC list of Banned fireworks for sale to consumers and the use there of. I further read that in a listing put out by the APA, the State of WI bans, or prohibits, the possession and use of, Firecrackers, Roman Candles, Salutes , Bombs, Skyrockets, and Wheels. Yet they are being advertised for sale by a local Fireworks Dealer. The City Administrator and City Clerk does not know of any municipal permit or license issued to this dealer in the past to possess , offer for sale,or store fireworks in the City of Prescott. This information came about from the City getting a new Fire Chief who addressed the fact that there are Fireworks stored in a storage building that the Fire Dept has no record of ever issuiug a permit for. The Dealer also cannot produce ant documentation allowing for storage of Fireworks or any document showing the building was inspected and approved by Prescott's Fire Chief. Prescott's Ordinance specifies 500 ft from a dwelling and the dealer has requested that we change our ordinance to meet the State of Wl's law of 50 ft. I am looking for a list of CPSC illegal or banned fireworks for my file. Hopefully it will be as per states. Thanks for reading my letter. John MacLennan Alderman at Large for the City of Prescott WI

Eric Middendorf B&B Fireworks 45 1 Johnson Drive Russellville, KY 42276

August 28,2006 Office of the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 502 4330 East-West Highway Bethesda, Maryland 208 14 Re: Fireworks ANPR Dear Sir or Madame: This is in response the Fireworks ANPR posted by CPSC to the Federal Register on July 12, 2006. Allowing an outside organization (such as the AFSL) to tell a government related body (such as the CPSC) what to do seems ridiculous to me. The AFSL represents only a small sample size of the entire fireworks industry. With only a small amount of companies being represented, it is easy to question who is actually benefiting from these AFSL standards and policies. Are these AFSL policies good for the entire fireworks industry, or are they only helping the AFSL affiliated companies?
I promote safety in the fireworks industry and have for many years. I also respect the CPSC and the hard work that they put forth to keep the consumers safe. I just question the use of standards from a private organization being universally adopted as a government standard.

As always, feel free to contact me with any further questions or comments regarding this matter. Best regards,

b
Eric Middendorf

1

rage r or r

4 f1

From: Sent: To:

FerPeteSak@aol.com Thursday, August 31,2006 6:29 AM Stevenson, Todd A.

Subject: Fireworks ANPR

The American Fireworks Standards Laboratory (AFSL) has developed voluntary standards pertaining to fireworks. The AFSL standards incorporate both CPSC and Department of Transportation regulations as well as a number of standards developed by AFSL that are in addition to Federal requirements.. Why is this insufficient? What data supports your position?

NFPA 1 Batterymarch Park Quincy, MA 02269-9101 USA phone (617) 984-7424 Fax: (617) 984-7056 E-mail: ifrna@nfpa.org
September 5, 2006 Office of the Secretary Consumer Product Safety Commission Room 502 4330 East-West Highway Bethesda, MD 208 14 RE: Fireworks ANPR, Federal Register 71 FR 39249

c;: a
I

~2 ~m 73 3% - 5% .. 30
a

$% 32 %"

-- zg
4

The International Fire Marshals Association (IFMA) would llke to respond to your solicitation for comments in your advance nobce of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) published in the Federal Register 71 FR 39249, July 12, 2006. The number of deaths, injuries and fire associated with consumer use of fireworks is unacceptable. The amount of fireworks used by consumer's increases each year and so due the number of incidents. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Annual Fireworks Report as well as the CPSC Annual Fireworks Report shows an increase in the number of deaths and injuries from consumer use of fireworks. These numbers are alarming based on the short term use, usually a few weeks during the forth of July and other holidays, and the number of incidents. What these numbers do not show is the additional number of injuries incurred by fire fighters and other emergency responders who respond t o these incidents. The majority, forty-four percent, of the victims are under age 15. These victims are either given sparklers t o hold or are the innocent victims of others using fireworks. We believe that the people affected, the number of deaths and injuries, and fire loss is unacceptable. IFMA has been against the consumer use of fireworks for over 60 years. IFMA has been the custodian of the Model Fireworks Law (a copy is attached) which prohibits use of fireworks by consumers. This law is the basis for many areas that prohibit the consumer use of fireworks. We would urge the CPSC t o adopt the IFMA Model Fireworks Law as the model law for the nation t o prohlbit consumer fireworks sales and possession by the public. The increase in deaths, injuries and fires cited by the statistics provide additional support and added urgency t o our position advocating against the use of fireworks by consumers. Current regulations, except for those areas that prohibit the sale and use of consumer fireworks, have not provided the public with the adequate safety against these devices. IFMA maintains its position and will continue t o urge people to attend public displays organized and conducted by professionals and t o not use them themselves. When that happens, we can b e p t o prevent these needless deaths, injuries, and fires from consumer fireworks. Sincerely,

Jon Nisja President Attachments: IFMA Model Fireworks Law, 2006

ORGANIZED 1906, REORGANIZED 1927 A S A SECTION THE NATIONAL OF FIREPROTECTION ASSOCIATION

MODEL FIREWORKS LAW

2006 Edition
International Fire Marshals Association 1 Batterymarch Park Quincy, MA 02269-9101 (617)984-7424 Fax: (617)984-7056

Model Fireworks Law 2006
IFMA Executive Board 2005 President Scott Adams, Fire Marshal, Park City Fire District, UT First Vice President Jon Nisja, Minnesota State Fire Marshals Office, St. Paul, MN Second Vice President Jimmy Hill, Deputy Chief/Fire Marshal, Los Angeles City Fire Department, Los Angeles, CA Secretary Charles "Ed" Altizer, State Fire Marshal, Virginia State Fire Marshals Office, Richmond, VA Immediate Past President John F. Bender, Chief Fire Protection Engineer, Maryland State Fire Marshals Office, Pikesville, MD Ken Crews, Fire Marshal, Durham Fire Department, Durham, NC R. T. Leicht, Chief Fire Protection Specialist, Delaware State Fire Marshals Office, Wilmington, DE David Lind, Fire Marshal, North Shore Fire Department, Bayside, WI Steven Peavey, Deputy Fire Marshal, Altamonte Springs Building/Fire Safety, Altamonte Springs, FL Executive Secretary Steven F. Sawyer, NFPA, Quincy, MA

Model Fireworks Law 2006 Edition

This edition of the Model Fireworks Law was prepared by the International Fire Marshals Association and published by NFPA. The NFPA Standards Council reviewed this model law at its October 2005 meeting for consistency with the policies of NFPA. This edition of the Model Fireworks Law supersedes all previous editions.
Origin and Development of the Model Fireworks Law

The National Fire Protection Association was among the pioneers who sought relief for the public from injuries and fires resulting from indiscriminate use of fireworks. Its efforts progressed from propagandizing during the early years of this century to a suggested municipal ordinance and then to a Model State Fireworks Law. The Model State Fireworks Law was first adopted by the NFPA in 1938. In 1949, the model law was amended to exclude from its provisions certain toy paper caps and devices for using them. The Model State Fireworks Law found prompt acceptance in many states. Its basic philosophy, which is the restriction of the use of all fireworks, except toy paper or plastic caps, to authorized public displays, is incorporated in the laws of several states. The Model State Fireworks Law was amended in 1972 and 1974. In 1978, its designation was changed from NFPA 494L to NFPA 1 l2lL. NFPA 1 121L was amended in 1982. In 1988, the Board of Directors of the National Fire Protection Association transferred custody of the model law from the NFPA Committee on Pyrotechnics to the Fire Marshals Association of North America (now known as the International Fire Marshals Association). The model law was amended in 1991to be readily adoptable by both state and local jurisdictions. Further changes include a provision that makes possession of fireworks by the general public illegal and violations of the law that result in a fire, personal injury, or death a felony offense. The 2000 edition updated the law to reflect current fireworks classification, laws, and codes and standards. The 2006 edition reaffirmed the 2000 edition.

Model Fireworks Law 2006 Edition BE IT ENACTED BY THE (GOVERNING BODY) OF THE (JURISDICTION)
I. No person, firm, or corporation shall possess, offer for sale, expose for sale, sell at retail, or use or explode any fireworks, except as herein provided. 2. Fireworks. Any composition or device for the purpose of producing a visible or an audible effect by combustion, deflagration, or detonation, and which meets the definition of "consumer (Explosive's 1.4G)", "theatrical and novelty (Explosives 1.4s)'' or "display (Explosive's 1.3G)" fireworks as set forth in the U.S. Department of Transportation's (DOT) Hazardous Materials Regulation, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Parts 171-180. Exception No. I : Toy capsfor use in toy pistols, toy canes, or toy guns, and trick noisemakers manufactured in accordance with DOT regulations, 49 CFR 173.100 (p), and packed and shipped according to said regulations. Exception No. 2: Model rockets and model rocket motors designed, sold, and used for the purpose ofpropelling recoverable aero models. Exception No. 3: Propelling or expelling charges consisting of a mixture of sulfir, charcoal, saltpeter are not considered as designed to produce audible efsects.

3. The authority having jurisdiction shall be permitted to adopt reasonable rules and regulations for the licensing of individuals or granting of permits for supervised displays of fireworks by municipalities, fair associations, amusement parks, and other organizations or groups of individuals. Such permits shall be permitted to be granted upon application to the authority having jurisdiction and approval in accordance with the regulations for the display and filing of a bond by the permit application. (See NFPA 1123,Codefor Fireworks Display and NFPA 1126, Standard for the Use of Pyrotechnics before a Proximate Audience.)
4. Every such display shall be handled by a competent operator, licensed or certified as to competency by the authority having jurisdiction. Every such display shall be of such composition and character and shall be located, discharged, or fired so as, in the opinion of the authority having jurisdiction, after proper site inspection, not to be hazardous to any person or property. After such privileges have been granted, sales, possession, use, and distribution of fireworks for such displays shall be lawful for that purpose only. No permit granted hereunder shall be transferable.

5. Before any permit for a pyrotechnic display shall be issued, the person, firm, or corporation making application therefore shall furnish proof of financial responsibility to satisfy claims for damages to property or personal injuries arising out of any act or omission on the part of such person, firm, or corporation or any agent or employee thereof, in such amount, character, and form as this jurisdiction determines to be necessary for the protection of the public.

6. Nothing in this law shall be construed to prohibit any of the following: (a) The sale, at wholesale, of any fireworks for supervised displays by any approved resident manufacturer, wholesaler, dealer, or jobber, in accordance with regulations of the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (see Title 27, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 181) and the U.S. Department of Transportation. (b) The manufacture, transportation, or storage of fireworks at a manufacturing facility. The testing of fireworks under the direction of its manufacturer provided permission for such testing has been obtained from the authority having jurisdiction. (c) The sale, transportation, handling, or use of industrial pyrotechnic devices or fireworks, such as railroad torpedoes, fusees, automotive, aeronautical, and marine flares and smoke signals. (d) The sale and use of blank cartridges for use in a show or theater; for signal or ceremonial purposes; in athletics or sports; or legal power tools. (e) The transportation, handling, or use of any pyrotechnic devices by the armed forces of the United States. (f) The use of pyrotechnics in training by the fire service, law enforcement, or similar government agencies. (g) The use of fireworks for agricultural purposes under the direct supervision of the U.S. Department of the Interior or an equivalent state or local agency. [See Title 16, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1500.17(a)(8).]

7. The authority having jurisdiction shall seize, take, remove, or cause to be removed at the expense of the owner all stocks of fireworks offered or exposed for sale or stored or held in violation of the law.2
8. Any person, firm, or corporation violating the provisions of this law shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. 9. Any person, firm, or corporation violating the provisions of this law, which results in a fire, personal injury, or death, shall be guilty of a felony.

lo. Any provisions of this law held to be unconstitutional shall not invalidate the
remainder thereof. Any acts, laws, or parts of laws in conflict with any provision of this law are hereby repealed to the extent of the conflict. The regulations referred to limit the explosive content of each cap to not more than an average of 0.25 grains (i6mg). Also, each package containing such caps must be labeled to indicate the maximum explosive content per cap. * Where no provision in law already exists for the disposition of goods seized in violation of this law, appropriate provisions shall be enacted for the legal disposition of fireworks by the authority having jurisdiction following conviction for such violation.

Stevenson, Todd A.
From: rj-pelon [rj-pelon@hotmail.com] Wednesday, September 06,2006 6:14 PM Stevenson, Todd A.

Sent:
To :

Subject: FIREWORKS ANPR
my comment in response to the article "Amendment to

Fireworks Safety Standards" found here http://www.cpsc.nov/businfo/fmotices/frO6/E610881. html are as follows:

i believe one of the main safety rules with consumer fireworks is "Not to light more then one item at a time" and this safety rule is being totally disregarded by many consumers in states where fireworks are legalized' for example' but not limited to "Chain Fusing" multiple items together to ignite more then one item simultaneously, this is a danger to many onlookers as well as those igniting the devices, devices used to perform this act are often described as' but not limited to "Mortar Racks" "Rocket Racks" Cake Boards" ect.. It is also my understanding that these consumers are often purchasing these fireworks "Wholesale" tlirough many vender such as' but not limited to "Hales" "Millers" ect, often purchasing in Bulk at reduced prices more then can safely be consumed in a normal amount of time, example' but not limited to "4th of July" evening of reasonably' and are often purchased in bulk to Mimic professional displays. I believe consumer grade fireworks become unsafe when consumers deliberately "Alter" "Ignore" "Disregard" and Tamper with these devices and cause more injuries that my result in permanent bans in the future for generations to come, to remedy this i can only suggest the to: following changes such as' but not lirr~ited I. allowing "Wholesale Purchases to Consumers". Not 2. Restrict the Amount a Consumer Can Legally Have in Possession' at hidher home or private property, to an amount that can safely be used within a given amount of time of normal use following written directions on the items. 3. Restrict the purchase amount to be hauled on public road ways to a certain amount that is of reasonable use.

...the idea of consumer firework devices being made today more safer then in the past is done away with when individuals begin to diregard the safety warnings put on the devices and alteritamper with these devices to attempt to lightlignite more then one item, which in turn makes the items unsafe' and by doing so teaches others of different age groups to do the same' and disregard safety warnings on these firework devices.
Thank you for reading my voluntary submission in response to the article mentioned and highlight above.

Vince Scarpello [scarp9603@yahoo.com] Wednesday, September 06,2006 10:21 PM Sent: To : Stevenson, Todd A. Subject: FIREWORKS ANPR.
From:

Risk of injury: The number of injuries is going up because the consumption of fireworks in the United States has risen so dramatically over the past 30 years, from 29 million pounds in 1976 to over 28 1 million pounds in 2005. There has been a 90% decrease in fireworks-related injuries per 100,000 pounds: in 1976 the fireworks-related injury rate was 38.3 per 100,000 pounds, compared to 3.8 per 100,000 pounds in 2005. Risk of injury associated with fireworks that do not comply with the current fireworks device re~ulations: Current regulations limit firecrackers to 50 mg of flash powder, and aerial reports to 130 mg. There are hundreds of injuries from manufacturing and use of 'bootleg' fireworks that exceed this standard. These 'bootleg' fireworks are usually made in someone's garage instead of a factory, so there is usually no quality control or safety testing, and therefore the devices are more dangerous because they are not consistent or reliable. A solution to this problem would be to RAISE the legal limits to 130 mg of powder for firecrackers, and 2 grams for aerial reports. This would replace most 'bootleg' fireworks with safer, more consistent and reliable, devices made in a factory, which would thus be regulated, and subject to quality control and safety testing. With less risk of injury to the consumer. Sincerely, Vince Scarpello Get your email and more, right on the new Yahoo.com

From: Sent: To:

ATLASIMPORTERS@aol.com Wednesday, September 06,2006 2 5 1 PM Stevenson, Todd A.

Subject: Re: 'Fireworks ANPR'

Date: Sept. 06, 2006 To: ANPR From: Hoyt L. Graham Our fireworks industry is currently required to use CPSC regulations as minimal requirements for 1.4 fireworks permitted into the US market. We also have testing conducted by AFSL that uses the CPSC standards plus more stringent additional criteria's. You currently have a choice to use various testing methods....Black Cat testing program, your own testing program and several other 3rd party companies that also provide testing to CPSC standards. 1. The CPSC is considering making the current AFSL standards and testing program mandatory for all US fireworks importers. (All break charges will only be 25 gr with AFSL vs 35 gr for CPSC, for instance. Sometimes the 5 gr makes the item much safer.)
2. We support AFSL's intent of making fireworks safer for everyone, but believe strongly that the current AFSL standards are too ambiguous to be enforced in a fair manner.

3. The ambiguity and lack of specific guidelines and testing procedures leads to unnecessary uncertainty for fireworks importers. Even if we do our own testing before submitting to AFSL testing, we do not know if a batch will pass, because too much discretion is left in the hands of the individual tester. 4. Leaving so much leeway in the hands of the individual tester is conducive to corruption to the system. 5. The current ambiguity of the standards allows shippers and importers to game the system and get products passed even though the products do not meet AFSL standards. 6. It is a restraint of free trade to force everyone to use ITS as the only approved tester for the AFSL standards. If AFSL believes in its standards and the testability of its standards, then any third party tester should be able to test to those standards.
7. CPSC should prevail as the regulations leader not AFSL.

8. We would be supportive of making AFSL's standards mandatory, only if AFSL does the following: (I) Completes a full review of each of its standards and subjects the standards of outside technical review and human factors analysis. (11) Provides comprehensive standards that includes specific guidelines, acceptable materials, procedures,tolerances, and detailed testing procedures. (Ill) Allows any recognized third party testing agency to test products in accordance with the AFSL standards. I was involved with starting up the AFSL and we have definitely seen some benefits from its efforts. However, we should always leave the door open for testing to be performed by more than just one body. Best Regards, Atlas Importers. Inc. Hoyt L. Graham

From:
Sent:

Skinsjason@aol.com Wednesday, September 06,2006 11:28 PM Stevenson, Todd A.

To:

Subject: fireworks'anrp.

the fireworks that need more checking are items that have wings /or take o f f and fly such as buzz bombs ect.the amount of injuries is misleading most are from kids doing things with them they shouldn't or there illegal explosive kind news agency's flood the airways with false propaganda t o get more anti firework support what would help is area specifically f o r fireworks in addition they should be legal nation wide a t least safe n sane people love there fireworks and those who dont shouldn't be able t o ruin our fun there countless other ways f i r e starts such as weed wackers .motorcycles,lawn mowers. cigarettes .lightning, BBQ'S ,campfires kitchen stoves if safety is the case ban all flammable items or ignition items

Thunder Fireworks, Inc
5207 1 8 7 Street E., Tacoma, Washington 98446 ~~

September 7,2006

Consumer Product Safety Commission Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR)

To Whom It May Concern: It has come to my attention that CPSC is considering the adoption of the current AFSL standards and testing procedures. Even though the intent of the fireworks industry desires safer fireworks, I believe strongly that the current AFSL standards are too ambiguous to be enforced in a fair manner. The lack of specific guidelines and testing procedures leads to unnecessary uncertainty for the fireworks importers. The directors and leaders of AFSL are involved in the fireworks industry which in turn could cause potential corruption. Currently, the standards allow shippers and importers to trick the system in order to get products passed even though the products do not meet AFSL standards. Thunder Fireworks, Inc has seen this corruption first hand in the Northwest of importers in the State of Washington. As of today, AFSL has accomplished safer fireworks but there is a restraint of free trade to force everyone to use ITS as the only approved tester for the AFSL standards while there is no other approved third party testing. We would be supportive of making AFSL standards mandatory, if AFSL completes the following: Completes a full review of each of its standards and subjects the standards to outside technical review and human factors analysis. Provide a comprehensive standard that includes specific guidelines, acceptable materials, procedures, tolerances, and detailed testing procedures. Allows any recognized third party testing agency to test products in accordance with the AFSL standards.

Sincerely,

Debbie Rozzano-Gord President

Stevenson, Todd A.
From: Sent: To : Subject:

Debbie Rozzano-Gord [dgord@thunderfireworks.corn] Friday, September 08, 2006 12:lO PM Stevenson, Todd A. Proposed Rule ANPR

Attachments: ANPR Letter vr.doc

Please open the attached letter in regards to the above proposal. Sincerely, Debbie Rozzano-Gord Thunder Fireworks, Inc 253.875.0700 Phone 253.875.0550 Fax

rage

I 01 I

Stevenson, Todd A.
From:
The Yeager's [yeagerb@madisontelco.com] Thursday, September 07, 2006 11:50 AM Stevenson, Todd A.

Sent:
To:

Subject: FIREWORKS ANPR.

Greetings, Subject to the request for comments on Amendment to Fireworks Safety Standards; Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; Request for Comments and information, I would like to make two pointslcomments: 1) By the CPSC's own special study between the month of June lath, 2005 and July lath, 2005:

"an estimated 6,500 fireworks related injuries were treated in U.S. hospital emergency departments \2\ (compared with 6,600 injuries in the 2004 special study and 6,800 injuries during the 2003 special study period)."
This trend actually shows a decrease in the number of injuries year-to-year and thus I question the reason or motive behind this request for comments. 2) The CPSC seems focused on the pyrotechnic devices in lue of the pyrotechnic users. Though I do agree that a consistent and safe standard for fireworks should be adhered to and I compliment the CPSC's diligent work to keep the devices safe for American consumers, in my opinion there should be a concerted effort to create a fireworks licensing program to require the American consumer to take a certified safety coarse and become licensed prior to purchasing pyrotechnic devices. The funds created by the licensing program can be earmarked for CPSC initiatives such as hiring more agents and/or creating a standards and testing bureau. This would allow a duel pronged approach to creating a safer environment for the proper and safe use of fireworks. Device standards and licensed users who have been certified on how to properly use pyrotechnic devices. Education is key t o any REAL safety initiative. The APA as well as PGI can certainly work with the CPSC to develop a certified training and safety coarse that could be applied nationally.

National Fire Protection Association
1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 Phone: 617-770-3000 Fax: 617-770-0700 www.nfpa.org

.

.

September 7,2006 Office of the Secretary Consumer Product Safety Commission Room 502 4330 East-West Highway Bethesda, MD 208 14

Re: Fireworks ANPR, Federal Register 71 FR 39249
Dear Mr. Secretary, The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) is pleased to have this opportunity to respond to your solicitation for comments to the queries presented in your advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) published in the Federal Register 71 FR 39249, July 12,2006. NFPA agrees with the ANPR that the number of injuries associated with consumer fireworks has been rising for several years. The level is high enough to pose an unreasonable risk to consumers. The first item in the ANPR asks for comments on the injury risks associated with consumer fireworks, with emphasis on the evidence presented in the ANPR. Each year NFPA prepares and publishes its annual Fireworks Report that details numbers and trends associated with fireworks-related injuries and deaths and structure and vehicle fires started by fireworks. This report reflects data within the National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) and National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS), the latter providing the same data cited in the ANPR. A copy of the full report is attached with these comments. The 2006 report cites the 2004 CPSC NEISS data which showed there were 9,600 fireworks-related injuries treated in U.S. hospital emergency rooms. As noted in Section C. of this ANPR, the most recent CPSC data further substantiates the trend shown in fireworks-related injuries since 1996, which is up again in 2005 to 10,800 injuries. As in most years, the majority of victims of fireworks injuries were under age 20. Another fireworks-related risk not addressed by CPSC in this ANPR, but directly related to establishing the risk associated with fireworks use by consumers is the number of fires caused by fireworks each year. In 2003, an estimated 2,300 reported structure or vehicle fires were started by fireworks. These fires resulted in 5 reported civilian deaths, 60 civilian injuries, and $58 million in direct property damage. The risks of fireworks are typically encountered for only a few days each year. On the July 4" Independence Day holiday in a typical year, fireworks are the leading cause of reported fire, accounting for more outdooi- fires in the U.S. than all other causes of outdoor fires combined.

Consumer fireworks have the highest estimated risk of fire death relative to exposure time of any product used in or around the home.

National Fire Protection Association CPSC-ANPR Response Page 2 of 4

NFPA opposes all consumer fireworks use by the public.
NFPA has a long-standing position firmly against the dangerous practice of private (consumer) use of fireworks, which as noted, accounts for nearly all of the injuries from fireworks in most years. Many states still permit untrained citizens to purchase and use fireworks - objects that by their nature and design are intended to produce showers of hot sparks, or reach sui-face temperatures as high as 1200" F. The thousands of serious injuries and extensive property loss nearly all arise from this dangerous activity. The increase in injuries cited by CPSC in this ANPR provides additional support and added urgency to our position advocating against the use of consumer fireworks. Since 1910, NFPA has maintained the position that fireworks are too dangerous to be used by consumers. We encourage the public to enjoy their fireworks at public fireworks displays put on by trained professionals. In support of that position, the International Fire Marshals Association (IFMA) and NFPA prepare and publish the Model Fireworks Law, which prohibits possession, sale, or use of any fireworks, with some limited exceptions (copy attached to this submittal). The purpose of the law is to provide requirements in a form that is readily adoptable by both state and local jurisdictions. The second item in this ANPR seeks input regarding the regulatory alternatives being considered and possible alternatives for addressing the risk. NFPA recommends that CPSC consider adopting the Model Fireworks Law as an alternative to the current regulations as a means for addressing the risk associated with fireworks use by the public. The Model Fireworks Law was first adopted by the NFPA in 1938. Its basic philosophy is the restriction of the use of all fireworks, except toy paper or plastic caps, to authorized public displays, and these requirements have been incorporated into the laws of several states. The Model Fireworks Law, prepared by IFMA and published by NFPA, reflects NFPA's zero-tolerance policy for consumer use of fireworks. The Model Fireworks Law provides an alternative to the current regulatory approach in the wake of the multi-year upward trend in injuries sustained by individuals engaged in the use of legal consumer fireworks. The Model Fireworks Law represents an existing standard that could be used immediately as a proposed regulation. NFPA offers the Model Fireworks Law in response to both the third and fourth items on which information and comment is sought.

Many responsible health and safety advocacy groups also oppose public access to fireworks.
In addition to NFPA, a wide range of safety and public health groups that include NFPA, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Bum Association have concluded that the use of fireworks by consumers poses a major public health concern. Nonetheless public access to consumer fireworks has continued to increase. In fact, now only five states ban the use of all fireworks by individual consumers.

Most fireworks injuries are caused by consumer fireworks that are legal under current Federal law.
Five out of six emergency room fireworks injuries involved fireworks permitted by the Federal regulations for use by the consumer. Federal law permits public use of what are now referred to as "consumer fireworks" (formerly known as "common" or Class C fireworks) that comply with specific construction, chemical composition, and labeling regulations.

National Fire Protection Association CPSC-ANPR Response Page 3 of 4

Some states further restrict the public's access to fireworks (only 5 states currently ban access by the public to all fireworks). Six staLes allow only sparklers and/or novelties, while these common devices account for approximately one-third of the total injuries each year. This limitation on device type carries the label "safe and sane," and generally refers to sparklers, fountains, snakes, party poppers, and ground spinners. "Safe and sane" fireworks caused more injuries than illegal fireworks, especially to preschool children. In 2004, sparklers, fountains, and novelties alone accounted for two-fifths of fireworks injuries, including most injuries to pre-school children where the type of fireworks device was specified. In addition to the number of injuries, sparklers can also start very large fires.

The evidence in the ANPR does not support the claim that changes to the testing requirements or compliance rates will reduce the harm caused by consumer fireworks.
This ANPR does not establish a relationship between the compliance rate of tested fireworks and the number of injuries. No correlation has been shown by CPSC between the injury rate and whether the device complies with the testing requirements or practices. The fireworks involved in the injuries cited by CPSC and reported in the NFPA Fireworks Report are not identified or restricted to only devices tested or not tested by the AFSL test program. Furthermore, any examination of sample narratives from NEISS fireworks injuries will show all or nearly all injuries linked to user errors and not to product deficiencies. These narratives provide further evidence that the unacceptably high risk of injury to untrained, unlicensed consumers is inherent in the devices and the speed with which any error can translate into serious harm.

NFPA publishes standards for use by professionals in the distribution of consumer fireworks, but this standard does not imply that the risk of consumer use of those fireworks is manageable or acceptable.
The problem associated with the use of consumer fireworks includes fires in addition to the injuries. In response to requests from fire officials, NFPA has developed a new chapter in one of NFPA's pyrotechnics codes, NFPA 1124, Code for the Manufacture, Transportation, Storage, and Retail Sales of Fireworks and Pyrotechnic Articles, which provides minimum requirements for retail facilities that sell consumer fireworks. Our development of these requirements reflects the fact that in most parts of the country, retail sales are allowed but in no way shows a weakening of the resolve on the issue of whether they should be allowed. NFPA believes that fireworks are too inherently dangerous to be used by consumers and that retail sales of fireworks should be banned everywhere.

Consumer fireworks represent an unrecognized and uncontrolled point of vulnerability in homeland security.

In this period of heightened awareness and protection of public safety in the name of homeland security, it
is also important that any explosive commodity be carefully controlled so as not to become the source for a makeshift weapon or incendiary device. At the present time, consumer fireworks, which are classified as an Explosive, Class 1.4 G, usually are provided to the public without any controls on the qualifications of the consumer or their intent. As we have just witnessed with the recent attention to the potential for creating weapons from common substances involving liquids and off-the-shelf materials, it seems prudent that some controls be established for consumer fireworks.

National Fire Protection Association CPSC-ANPR Response Page 4 of 3

The time is now to protect Americans from the unacceptably high and rising risk of injury from consumer fireworks.
The number of injuries suffered annually by the public from these legal devices and the extensive property loss caused by fires started by these devices demand that some action be taken to restrict and thus reduce the use by the untrained public. We believe strongly that fireworks are too inherently dangerous to be used by consumers and that retail sales of fireworks should be banned everywhere. Focusing on testing requirements and compliance rates for existing Federal laws has not been an effective approach to reducing the annual toll from consumer fireworks. A new approach is necessary, namely, the adoption of the Model Fireworks Law. NFPA maintains its position and will continue to urge people to attend public displays organized and conducted by professionals and to not use fireworks themselves. By banning the use of consumer fireworks, we will prevent these needless deaths, injuries, and fires. Sincerely,

'president and CEO Attachments: NFPA Fireworks Report, 2006 Model Fireworks Law, 2006

MODEL FIREWORKS LAW

2006 Edition
International Fire Marshals Association 1 Batterymarch Park Quincy, MA 02269-910 1 (617)984-7424 Fax: (617)984-7056

Model Fireworks Law
2006
IFMA Executive Board 2005 President Scott Adams, Fire Marshal, Park City Fire District, UT First Vice President Jon Nisja, Minnesota state Fire Marshals Office, St. Paul, MN Second Vice President Jimmy Hill, Deputy Chief/Fire Marshal, Los Angeles City Fire Department, Los Angeles, CA Secretary Charles "Ed" Altizer, State Fire Marshal, Virginia State Fire Marshals Office, Richmond, VA Immediate Past President John F. Bender, Chief Fire Protection Engineer, Maryland State Fire Marshals Office, Pikesville, MD Ken Crews, Fire Marshal, Durham Fire Department, Durham, NC R. T. Leicht, Chief Fire Protection Specialist, Delaware State Fire Marshals Office, Wilmington, DE David Lind, Fire Marshal, North Shore Fire Department, Bayside, WI Steven Peavey, Deputy Fire Marshal, Altamonte Springs Building/Fire Safety, Altamonte Springs, FL Executive Secretary Steven F. Sawyer, NFPA, Quincy, MA

Model Fireworks Law 2006 Edition This edition of the Model Fireworks Law was prepared by the International Fire Marshals Association and published by NFPA. The NFPA Standards Council reviewed this model law at its October 2005 meeting for consistency with the policies of NFPA. This edition of the Model Fireworks Law supersedes all previous editions. Origin and Development of the Model Fireworks L a w The National Fire Protection Association was among the pioneers who sought relief for the public from injuries and fires resulting from indiscriminate use of fireworks. Its efforts progressed from propagandizing during the early years of this century to a suggested municipal ordinance and then to a Model State Fireworks Law. The Model State Fireworks Law was first adopted by the NFPA in 1938. In 1949, the model law was amended to exclude from its provisions certain toy paper caps and devices for using them. The Model State Fireworks Law found prompt acceptance in many states. Its basic philosophy, which is the restriction of the use of all fireworks, except toy paper or plastic caps, to authorized public displays, is incorporated in the laws of several states. The Model State Fireworks Law was amended in 1972 and 1974. In 1978, its designation was changed from NFPA 494L to NFPA 1 121L. NFPA 1 121L was amended in 1982. In 1988, the Board of Directors of the National Fire Protection Association transferred custody of the model law from the NFPA Committee on Pyrotechnics to the Fire Marshals Association of North America (now known as the International Fire Marshals Association). The model law was amended in iggi to be readily adoptable by both state and local jurisdictions. Further changes include a provision that makes possession of fireworks by the general public illegal and violations of the law that result in a fire, personal injury, or death a felony offense. The 2000 edition updated the law to reflect current fireworks classification, laws, and codes and standards. The 2006 edition reaffirmed the 2000 edition.

Model Fireworks Law 2006 Edition BE IT ENACTED BY THE (GOVERNING BODY) OF THE (JURISDICTION)

No person, firm, or corporation shall possess, offer for sale, expose for sale, sell at retail, or use or explode any fireworks, except as herein provided.
I.

Fireworks. Any composition or device for the purpose of producing a visible or an audible effect by combustion, deflagration, or detonation, and which meets the definition of "consumer (Explosive's 1.4G)", "theatrical and novelty (Explosives 1.4s)" or "display (Explosive's 1.3G)" fireworks as set forth in the U.S. Department of Transportation's (DOT) Hazardous Materials Regulation, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Parts 171-180. Exception No. I : Toy capsfor use in toy pistols, toy canes, or toy guns, and trick noisemakers manufactured in accordance with DOT regulations, 49 CFR 173.100 (p), and packed and shipped according to said regulations. Exception No. 2: Model rockets and model rocket motors designed, sold, and used for the purpose of propelling recoverable aero models. Exception No. 3: Propelling or expelling charges consisting of a mixture of sulfur, charcoal, saltpeter are not considered as designed to produce audible effects.
2.

3. The authority having jurisdiction shall be permitted to adopt reasonable rules and regulations for the licensing of individuals or granting of permits for supervised displays of fireworks by municipalities, fair associations, amusement parks, and other organizations or groups of individuals. Such permits shall be permitted to be granted upon application to the authority having jurisdiction and approval in accordance with the regulations for the display and filing of a bond by the permit application. (See NFPA 1123, Codefor Fireworks Display and NFPA 1126, Standard for the Use of Pyrotechnics before a Proximate Audience.)

4. Every such display shall be handled by a competent operator, licensed or certified as to competency by the authority having jurisdiction. Every such display shall be of such composition and character and shall be located, discharged, or fired so as, in the opinion of the authority having jurisdiction, after proper site inspection, not to be hazardous to any person or property. After such privileges have been granted, sales, possession, use, and distribution of fireworks for such displays shall be lawful for that purpose only. No permit granted hereunder shall be transferable.
5. Before any permit for a pyrotechnic display shall be issued, the person, firm, or corporation making application therefore shall furnish proof of financial responsibility to satisfy claims for damages to property or personal injuries arising out of any act or omission on the part of such person, firm, or corporation or any agent or employee thereof, in such amount, character, and form as this jurisdiction determines to be necessary for the protection of the public.

6. Nothing in this law shall be construed to prohibit any of the following: (a) The sale, at wholesale, of any fireworks for supervised displays by any approved resident manufacturer, wholesaler, dealer, or jobber, in accordance with regulations of the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (see Title 27, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 181) and the U.S. Department of Transportation. (b) The manufacture, transportation, or storage of fireworks at a manufacturing facility. The testing of fireworks under the direction of its manufacturer provided permission for such testing has been obtained from the authority having jurisdiction. (c) The sale, transportation, handling, or use of industrial pyrotechnic devices or fireworks, such as railroad torpedoes, fusees, automotive, aeronautical, and marine flares and smoke signals. (d) The sale and use of blank cartridges for use in a show or theater; for signal or ceremonial purposes; in athletics or sports; or legal power tools. ( e ) The transportation, handling, or use of any pyrotechnic devices by the armed forces of the United States. (f) The use of pyrotechnics in training by the fire service, law enforcement, or similar government agencies. (g) The use of fireworks for agricultural purposes under the direct supervision of the U.S. Department of the Interior or an equivalent state or local agency. [See Title 16, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1500.17(a)(8).]
7. The authority having jurisdiction shall seize, take, remove, or cause to be removed at the expense of the owner all stocks of fireworks offered or exposed for sale or stored or held in violation of the law.2

8. Any person, firm, or corporation violating the provisions of this law shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. 9. Any person, firm, or corporation violating the provisions of this law, which results in a fire, personal injury, or death, shall be guilty of a felony.
10. Any provisions of this law held to be unconstitutional shall not invalidate the remainder thereof. Any acts, laws, or parts of laws in conflict with any provision of this law are hereby repealed to the extent of the conflict.

The regulations referred to limit the explosive content of each cap to not more than an average of 0.25 grains (16mg). Also, each package containing such caps must be labeled to indicate the maximum explosive content per cap. Where no provision in law already exists for the disposition of goods seized in violation of this law, appropriate provisions shall be enacted for the legal disposition of fireworks by the authority having jurisdiction following conviction for such violation.

FIREWORKS

John R. Hall, Jr. Fire Analysis and Research Division National Fire Protection Association June 2006

National Fire Protection Association, 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 www.nfpa.org

FIREWORKS

John R. Hall, Jr. Fire Analysis & Research Division National Fire Protecticn Association June 2006

Copyright@, 2006, National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, MA 02169-7471, www.nfpa.org

Abstract In 2004, 9,600 fireworks-related injuries were treated in U.S. hospital emergency rooms. The trend in fireworks-related injuries has been mostly up since 1996, with a sharp spike in 2000-200 1, primarily due to celebrations around the advent of a new millennium. The highest injury rates were for children aged 5 to 9, only slightly higher than the rates for children aged 10 to 14 and individuals aged 15 to 19.

In 2004, five out of six (85%) emergency room fireworks injuries involved fireworks that Federal regulations permit consumers to use. The risk of fire death relative to exposure shows fireworks as the riskiest consumer product.
Keywords: Fireworks, fire statistics, NFIRS, NEISS Acknowledgements The National Fire Protection Association thanks all the fire dep-artments and state fire authorities who participate in the National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) and the annual NFPA fire experience survey. These firefighters are the original sources of the detailed data that make this analysis possible. Their contributions allow us to estimate the size of the fire problem. We are also grateful to the U.S. Fire Administration for its work in developing, coordinating, and maintaining NFIRS. And we appreciate the important work done by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission to develop, maintain, and support analysis of the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) and the National Center for Health Statistics and the National Safety Council for maintenance and analysis of the U.S. death certificate data base. For more information about the ~ a t i o n aFire Protection Association, visit www.nfpa.org l or call 61 7-770-3000. To learn more about the One-Stop Data Shop go to www.nfpa.org/osds or call 6 17-984-7450. Copies of this report are available from: National Fire Protection Association One-Stop Data Shop 1 Batteryrnarch Park Quincy, MA 02169-747 1 www.nfpa.org email: osds@nfpa.org phone: 61 7-984-7450

Copyright0 2006, National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, MA

Executive Summary
In 2004, 9,600 fireworks-related injuries were treated in U.S. hospital emergency rooms. The trend in fireworks-related injuries has been mostly up since 1996, with a sharp spike in 2000-2001, primarily due to celebrations around the advent of a new millennium. Injuries were higher in 1984-1995 than in recent years but lower in the mid-1970s and earlier.

In 2003, an estimated 2,300 reported structure or vehicle fires started by fireworks. These fires resulted in 5 reported civilian deaths, 60 civilian injuries, and $58 million in direct property damage.
In 2003, 100 people were killed in a Rhode Island nightclub fire ignited by the indoor use of pyrotechnics in a small, crowded room with wall linings that promoted rapid flame spread. The facility had no sprinkler protection. These deaths were not included in the national estimates.

In 1998-2002, 8 people per year were killed in fires started by fireworks, while 6 people per year were killed directly by fireworks.
As in most years, the majority of victims of fireworks injuries in 2004 were under age 20. The highest injury rates were for children aged 5 to 9, only slightly higher than the rates for children aged 10 to 14 and individuals aged 15 to 19. Males accounted for nearly three-fourths (75%) of fireworks injuries.

In 2004, five out of six (85%) emergency room fireworks injuries involved fireworks that ~ederd regulations permit consumers to use.

+.-

The risk of fire death relative to exposure shows fireworks as the riskiest consumer product.

Fireworks, 6/06

NFPA Fire Analysis and Research, Qujncy, MA

Table of Contents
Page
Executive Summary Table of Contents Size of Fireworks Problem Characteristics of Injuries by Fireworks Risks of Private Fireworks Use Data Sources Appendix A: How National Estimates Are Calculated

11

NFPA Fire Analysis and Research, Quincy, MA

Size of the Fireworks Problem
In 2004,9,600 fireworks-related injuries were treated in U.S. hospital emergency rooms. The trend in fireworks-related injuries has been mostly up since 1996, except for a spike in 2000-2001, primarily due to celebrations around the advent of a new millennium. Injuries were higher in 1984-1995 than in recent years but lower in the mid-1970s and earlier. (See Figure 1.) These statistics are estimates based on the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission's National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) sample of hospital emergency rooms. In 2003, an estimated 2,300 reported structure or vehicle fires were ignited by fireworks. These fires resulted in 5 reported civilian deaths, 60 civilian injuries, and $58 million in direct property damage, excluding the Station night club fire, which was not included in the sample. (In 2003, 100 people were killed in a Rhode Island nightclub fire ignited by the indoor use of pyrotechnics in a small, crowded room with wall linings that promoted rapid flame spread. The facility had no sprinkler protection.) (See Table 1.)
Each year, most fireworks-related fires begin in outdoor brush or refuse, but most of the loss occurs in fires with structures involved. These fires can start with outdoor use of fireworks, as when a bottle rocket, launched outside, lands on a roof or other location not easily accessed, where it can ignite combustibles before anyone can retrieve it. Because cause information is no longer required for outdoor refuse fires, statistics for outdoor refuse fires by cause cannot be calculated. Therefore, no outdoor-fire statistics are shown here.

In 1998-2002, an estimated 8 people per year were killed in reported fires started by fireworks, while 6 people per year were killed directly by fireworks. Deaths involving fireworks are identified from two data sources, which may partially or largely overlap, because fireworks can kill directly and also start fires. (See Table 2.) The period of 1998-2002 is the latest 5-year period for which there is official data from death certificates. In both data bases, the death toll varies substantially from year to year, making trend analysis meaningless. As Figure 1 and Table 1 demonstrate, most non-fatal injuries due to fireworks do not occur in the context of a reported fire. For both fatal and non-fatal injuries, it is clear that fireworks can injure directly via a traumatic injury or indirectly via a fire injury from a fire initiated by the fireworks. As for non-fatal injuries, the available statistics also omit injuries that are treated in doctor's offices or are left untreated.

Fireworks, 6106

NFPA Fire Analysis and Research, Quincy, MA

.d

2 2
() I

<

CA

2 W
Z
() I

k a

0

Table 1. Fires and Losses Associated With Fireworks, 1980-2003 Fires Reported to U.S. Fire Departments A. Year Fires Home Structures Other Residential Structures Nonresidential Structures Total Structures Vehicles

Note: These are national estimates of fires reported to U.S. municipal fire departments and so exclude fires reported only to Federal or state agencies or industrial fire brigades. National estimates are projections. Casualty and loss projections can be heavily influenced by the inclusion or exclusion of one unusually serious fire. Fires are rounded to the nearest hundred. Figures reflect a proportional share of fires with heat source unknown. Source: NFIRS and NFPA survey.

3

NFPA Fire Analysis and Research, Quincy, MA

Table 1. Fires and Losses Associated With Fireworks, 1980-2003 Fires Reported to U.S. Fire Departments (Continued) B. Year Civilian Deaths Home Structures Other Residential Structures Nonresidential Structures Total Structures Vehicles

*Inflated by statistical projection of one Ohio fire with nine deaths.

** Does not include

100 deaths in the Station night club fire.

Note: These are national estimates of fires reported to U.S. municipal fire departments and so exclude fires reported only to Federal or state agencies or industrial fire brigades. National estimates are projections. Casualty and loss projections can be heavily influenced by the inclusion or exclusion of one unusually serious fire. Civilian deaths are expressed to the nearest one. Figures reflect a proportional share of fires with heat source unknown. Source: NFIRS and NFPA survey.

Fireworks,6/06

4

NFPA Fire Analysis and Research, Quincy, MA

Table 1. Fires and Losses Associated With Fireworks, 1980-2003 -.-Fires Reported to U.S. Fire Departments (Continued)

C.
Year

Civilian Injuries Home Structures Other Residential Structures Nonresidential Structures Total Structures Vehicles

Note: These are national estimates of fires reported to U.S. municipal fire departments and so exclude fires reported only to Federal or state agencies or industrial fire brigades. National estimates are projections. Casualty and loss projections can be heavily influenced by the inclusion or exclusion of one unusually serious fire. Civilian injuries are expressed to the nearest ten. Figures reflect a proportional share of fires with heat source unknown. Source: NFIRS and NFPA survey.

Fireworks, 6106

5

NFPA Fire Analysis and Research, Quincy, MA

Table 2. Deaths Associated With Fireworks Incidents, 1980-2004 Estimated Civilian Deaths in Structure or Vehicle Fires Reported to U.S. Fire Departments Recorded on U.S. Death Certificates

Year

* Inflated by statistical projection of one Ohio fire with nine deaths.
** Does not include 100 deaths in the Station night club fire.
Death certificate figures for 2003 and 2004 are preliminary based on reports to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission and exclude fireworks-caused fires, most notably the Station fire in 2003.

***

**** Not yet available.
Note: In any year, the figures in these two columns may partially overlap if fireworks that directly kill also ignite a reported fire. Sources: For death certificate tallies, Injury Facts, Chicago (1985-1992) and Itasca, IL (1993-2006): National Safety Council, 1985-2006. For national estimates of fire deaths, NFIRS and NFPA survey.

Fireworks. 6/06

7

NFPA Fire Analysis and Research, Quincy, MA

Characteristics of Fireworks Injuries
More than two-fifths (42%) of 2004 emergency room fireworks injuries were to the head, and more than half (53%) were to extremities. Injuries to extremities were primarily to hand or finger (33% of total injuries). (See Figure 2.) One-fifth (2 1%) of injuries were to the eye, and one-fifth (2 1%) were to other parts of the head or face. The detailed U.S. statistics are based on injuries reported to hospital emergency rooms for CPSC's NEISS system during the month around July 4. A 1998 study of all Canadian fireworks injuries ever reported to the Canadian Hospitals Injury Reporting and Prevention Program found a large share of injuries occurred while the victim was holding the fireworks device, and the U.S. injury patterns are at least consistent with that pattern. (See Health Canada, "Injuries associated with . . . fireworks," at http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca.) More than three-fifths (62%) of 2004 fireworks injuries were burns. Contusions and lacerations were second (20%). (See Figure 3.) Contusions and lacerations were roughly equal in number to bums when the injury was to any part of the head or face, including the eye. Highest risks of fireworks injury are to school-age children. As in most years, the majority of victims of fireworks injuries in 2004 were under age 20. (See Figure 4.) The highest injury rates were for children aged 5 to 9, only slightly higher than the rates for children aged 10 to 14 and individuals aged 15 to 19. The rates for children aged 0 to 4 and for young adults aged 20 to 24 were 50% higher than the average rate for all ages. (See Figure 5.) Males accounted for three-fourths (75%) of fireworks injuries. Similar patterns in fireworks injuries were found in the Health Canada study cited above. The highest rates in that study were for the 10 to 14 and 15 to 19 age groups, followed closely by the 5 to 9 age groups. A Greek study (K. Vassilia, P. Eleni, and T. Dimitrios, "Fireworks-related childhood injuries in Greece: A national problem," Burns, Vol. 30, No. 2, 2004, pp. 151- 153) found that young female victims were usually bystanders, while young male victims were usually involved in igniting fireworks. In 2004, five out of six (85%) emergency room fireworks injuries involved fireworks that Federal regulations permit consumers to use. The other 15% were largelillegal firecrackers, homemade or altered devices, and public display fireworks. Federal law permits public use of what are now referred to as "consumer fireworks" (formerly known as "common" or Class C fireworks), which are defined as "any small fireworks device designed primarily to produce visible effects by combustion" that comply with specific construction, chemical composition, and labeling regulations. These include a 50-mg maximum limit of explosive composition for ground devices and a 130-mg maximum limit of explosive composition for aerial devices. (See Figure 6.) Some states further restrict the public's access to fireworks. The following five states have banned access by the public to all fireworks - Delaware, Massachusetts, New
Fireworks,6/06
8 NFPA Fire Analysis and Research, Quincy, MA

Jersey, New York, and Rhode Island. Six states allow only sparklers and/or novelties, but these devices accounted for more than one-third of 2004 fireworks injuries.
"Safe and sane" fireworks caused more injuries than illegal fireworks, especially to preschool children. The term "safe and sane" fireworks is used to refer to devices such as sparklers, fountains, snakes, party poppers, and ground spinners. Six states permit sale of sparklers and some other devices of comparable strength - Arizona, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Ohio, and Vermont. As a promotional technique, the fireworks allowed under rules of this type have been labeled "safe and sane" fireworks by their advocates. Lavvs based on this approach allow considerable private use of fireworks, but exclude any explosive type devices that lift off the ground that are allowed under Federal law.

In 2004, sparklers, fountains, and novelties alone accounted for two-fifths (40%) of emergency-room fireworks injuries, including most injuries to pre-school children (ages 4 and under) where the type of fireworks device was specified. Here is a sample of NEISS incident narratives of pre-school child injuries from sparklers in 2004:
A 3-year-old boy was running with a burning sparkler, which somehow fell under the back of his shirt and bumed his lower back.

A 3-year-old boy burned his fingers on a lighted sparkler.
A 3-year-old boy stepped on a hot sparkler and suffered a second degree bum to his right foot.

A 3-year-old girl playing with sparklers sustained a second degree bum when a burning sprinkler contacted the left side of her head.
.-. A 3-year-old girl sustained a second degree bum when a burning sprinkler was dropped onto a toe on her right foot.

A 2-year-old girl sustained a second degree sparkler bum to her left shoulder and neck. A 4-year-old boy stepped on a burning sparkler, sustaining a second-degree bum to his foot, which later developed a secondary infection. And sparklers can also start very large fires, e.g.: A fire started in the bedroom of a first-floor apartment when a lit sparkler ignited a combustible bed skirt. The apartment's resident had placed the sparkler in a cupcake for her 10-year-old daughter's birthday. After sparks ignited the bed skirt, flames spread to bedding and other combustibles. The occupants detected the fire before smoke alarms could operate and escaped.

9

NFPA Fire Analysis and Research, Quincy, MA

Flames heavily damaged the bedroom of origin and other rooms in the apartment, while the structural steel elements sustained significant heat damage. Smoke extensively damaged the first floor and spread to the upper floors through a construction deficiency around a vertical ventilation shaft. Water damaged the lower floors. Damages were estimated at $1.6 million.* "Safe and sane" fireworks are neither. When things go wrong with fireworks, they typically go very wrong very fast, fai. faster than any fire protection provisions can reliably respond. And fireworks are a classic attractive nuisance for children. If children are present to watch, they will be tempted to touch. Children can move too fast and be badly hurt too quickly if they are close to fireworks, as they inevitably are at home fireworks displays.
State laws to restrict fireworks use by the public are very difficult to enforce. The other 39 states and the District of Columbia impose no restrictions beyond the Federal requirements. This patchwork approach meant that people determined to acquire fireworks though living in a state that prohibits them can often cross a state border to buy fireworks, thereby violating a state law that is difficult to enforce. Every year, for example, people from Massachusetts drive into neighboring New Hampshire - a trip of at most a couple of hours - and buy fireworks from rows of retail stands set up near the border for the convenience of the scofflaw trade.

It is possible that limited laws, such as the current Federal law, are actually more difficult to enforce than a broader law would be, because the existence of some legal fireworks for the public encourages a climate of acceptance and creates a distribution network, both of which make it easier for amateurs to obtain illegal fireworks. Since at least 1910, NFPA has crusaded to stop the dangerous private use of fireworks, which as noted accounts for nearly all of the injuries from fireworks in most years. Many states still permit untrained citizens to purchase and use fireworks - objects designed to explode, throw off showers of hot sparks, or reach surface temperatures as high as 1,200°F. The thousands of serious injuries and extensive property loss nearly all arise from this misguided activity, rather than the only acceptably safe way to enjoy fireworks, which is in public fireworks displays conducted in accordance with NFPA 1123, Codefor Fireworks Display. Anything else is a violation of IFMA's (International Fire Marshals Association's) Model Fireworks Law, which reflects NFPA's zero-tolerance policy for consumer use of fireworks.

*Adapted from Kenneth J . Tremblay, "Firewatch," NFPA Journal, MarchtApril 1997, p. 21.

Fireworks, 6/06

10

NFPA Fire Analysis and Research, Quincy, MA

e m -

-

-

.b a c k -

k % Z -

-

Figure 4. 2004 Fireworks-Related Injuries * by Age of Victim
45-64 years (4%)

\

, 65 years and over (1 %) , -

A

1

0

-

1

4 years (15%)

Source: CPSC's NEISS

*Based on injuries during the month around July 4.

Fireworks, 6/06

NFPA Fire Analysis & Research, Quincy, MA

Figure 5. Risk of 2004 Fireworks-Related Injury* by Age of Victim

*Based on injuries during the month around July 4. Source: CPSC's NElSS Note: Relative risk index is injuries per million population for the age group divided by injuries per million population for all ages combined.

Fireworks, 6/06

NFPA Fire Analysis & Research, Quincy, MA

Figure 6. 2004 Fireworks-Related Injuries* by Type of Fireworks (Unknowns Allocated)
Illlegal firecrackers * * Multiple tube (2%) Ronmn candles

Homemade or altered (4%)

Small firecrackers
Reloadables

Novelties (15%)-

f

Source: CPSC's NEISS

*Based on injuries during the month around July 4. **Illegal under Federal law.

Fireworks, 6/06

NFPA Fire Analysis & Research, Quincy, MA

Risks of Private Fireworks Use
The risks of fireworks are typically encountered for only a few days each year. On the July 4 Independence Day holiday in a typical year, fireworks are the leading cause of reported fire, accounting for more outdoor fires in the U.S. than all other causes of outdoor fires combined. (This characterization, based on patterns in late 1990s data, has not been reconfirmed with more current data, because NFIRS Version 5.0 does not require cause reporting for outdoor trash fires.) But because most exposure to the risk of fireworks is limited to a few days around July 4, the actual toll of loss is relatively small, and so the risk may not impress itself upon the average person. Some areas may also see heightened fireworks use around New Year's Day, Chinese New Year, or Mardi Gras. The same is true in some other countries. In the United Kingdom, a tradition exists for fireworks use on November 5, sometimes called "Bonfire Night," a date very near Halloween (October 3 1). In Canada, fireworks injuries peak on Halloween, Victoria Day (a Monday in late May), and Canada Day (July 1). Many countries see heightened fireworks use around Chinese New Year (late January or early February). Greeks see a jump in usage and injuries on Greek Orthodox Easter. But relatively few countries (China and Mexico may be among the exceptions) see substantial fireworks use yearround. The risk of fire death relative to exposure shows fireworks as the most risky consumer product. Risk estimates relative to exposure time are very rough, but even an estimate designed to give fireworks the benefit of the doubt supports the above conclusion. Take, for example, cigarettes, the product associated with the largest number of fire deaths per year and the only other product likely to have the highest risk of fire deaths relative to exposure time. Recent figures indicate 425-435 billion cigarettes are smoked per year by a smoking population that constitutes about one-fourth of the adult population, who themselves constitute three-fourths of the total population of roughly 280 million people. This translates into roughly 28 cigarettes per smoker per day and 52.5 million smokers. Assuming it takes at least 5 minutes on average to smoke a cigarette, this translates into just over 2 hours per day of exposure to the fire risks associated with a lit cigarette. The latest death toll from fires started by lit tobacco products, nearly all of which are cigarettes, is in the range of 700 to 900. The risk is therefore estimated as (700-900 deaths)/(2 hourslday x 365 days)l(52.5 million smokers) = 1.8-2.3 deaths per hundred million person-hours of exposure. Now, consider fireworks. Recent figures indicate 120- 130 million pounds of fireworks are used per year. Fireworks are typically used by households, so we assume that, on average, 2.6 people (the average size of a household) are exposed in any use of fireworks. A pound of fireworks will translate into a varying number of devices, depending on the type of device, but assume that on average a pound of fireworks bums for no more than 20 minutes. (The longer the time, the longer the estimated exposure time, and so the lower the estimated risk.) In 1998-2002, fires started by fireworks averaged 7.8 deaths a
Fireworks, 6/06

16

NFPA Fire Analysis & Research, Quincy, MA

year. (See Table 2.) The risk is therefore estimated as (7.8 deaths)/(2.6 people/exposure x 113 exposure-hourlpound x 130 million pounds) = 6.9 deaths per hundred million person-hours of exposure. The cigarette calculation errs on the side of overestimating the risk, because 5 minutes is a low-end estimate of smoking time per cigarette, particularly if one factors in the long smolder time of imperfectly extinguished cigarettes, which are a common scenario for fire. The fireworks calculation errs on the side of underestimating the risk, because 20 minutes is a high-end estimate of the average bum time for a pound of fireworks, possibly high by a factor of two to four. Yet, even with these assumptions, tile risk while fireworks are buming that a fire death will result is three to four times the corresponding risk when cigarettes are buming.
In recent years, the industry has asserted a risk-type argument based on the fact that fireworks consumption (in pounds) roughly doubled in the early to mid-1990s while hospital emergency-room injuries due to fireworks were declining. The above calculation shows the fallacy of this reasoning, which focuses on whether the risk is increasing or decreasing and not on how high the risk actually is.

,
r

.

,

The risks associated with fireworks are not limited to displays, public or private. Risks also exist wherever fireworks are manufactured, transported or stored. Most but not all such losses in recent decades have occurred in other countries, where fireworks activity is not controlled as tightly - or kept as separate from highly populated areas - as it tends to be in the U.S. The following incident descriptions are taken from NFPA's Fire Incident Data Organization (FIDO) database: In 1983, two separate massive fireworks explosion incidents in Mexico killed 34 and 21 people, respectively, the latter reportedly coming when a fireworks display flare ignited fireworks stored in the back room of a church. Fireworks displays are a%-aditionalpart of a religious festival called the Feast of the Holy Cross. In 1996, nine people died in an Ohio fire when a customer ignited a fireworks device in the sales display area of a fireworks retail facility, and the resulting fire quickly spread to the entire store inventory. (See NFPA Journal, September1 October 1997, p. 52.) In 2000, 18-20 people were killed in the Netherlands when a residential fire spread to a fireworks warehouse located next to the neighborhood. In 2002, three separate incidents in India involved explosions at fireworks storage facilities, killing 14, 13, and 12 people, respectively. The first incident involved storage at an ordinary home, while the last incident involved storage in a strawthatched warehouse where a short circuit ignited a fire that then led to an explosion when fire spread to fireworks. In 2006, 36 people were killed in Linqi, China, when fireworks ignited an explosion at a fireworks warehouse, resulting in a pressure wave that flattened a nearby temple, leading to the casualties.

Fireworks, 6/06

17

NFPA Fire Analysis & Research, Quincy, MA

Data Sources
Changes in NFIRS pose opportunities and challenges in describing and tracking the problem. The statistics in this report are national estimates derived from the US Fire Administration's (USFA's) National Fire Incident Reporting System @FIRS) in combination with NFPA's annual fire department survey. In Version 4.1, "fireworks" were usually understood to include two categories under form of heat of ignition - code 63 (fireworks) and code 64 (paper cap or party popper). In Version 5.0, these two groups of devices are combined into one - Heat Source code 54 (fireworks). Detailed information about NFIRS, including Version 4.1 and 5.0 codes and conversion tables, can be obtained from http://www.usfa.fema.aov/. Data on injuries at hospital emergency rooms come from NEISS. All fireworks-related injury statistics from hospital emergency rooms come from reports by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and private communications from Linda Smith and Michael Greene of the CPSC. Linda Smith also provided the rules for setting the range of fireworks injury estimates during the period from 1985 to 1989, reflecting the change in the sample, and in 1991 to 1996, reflecting the latest change in the sample. Reports referenced include Michael A. Greene and James Joholske, 2004 and 2003 Fireworks Annual Report; Michael A. Greene and Patrick M. Race, 1999 Fireworks Annual Report; Michael A. Greene, 1998 Fireworks-Related Injuries; Ron Monticone and Linda Smith, 1997 Fireworks-Related Injuries; Sheila L. Kelly, Fireworks Injuries, 1994; Dr. Terry L. Kissinger, Fireworks Injuries - Results o f a 1992 NEISS Study; Linda Smith and Sheila Kelly, Fireworks Injuries, 1990; Deborah Kale and Beatrice Harwood, Fireworks Injuries - 1981; and the MayIJune 1974 issue of NEISS News. All were published by CPSC.

Fireworks,6/06

18

NFPA Fire Analysis & Research, Quincy, MA

Appendix A: How National Estimate Fire Statistics Are Calculated Estimates are made using the National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA's) United States Fire Administration (USFA), supplemented by the annual stratified random-sample survey of fire experience conducted by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), which is used for calibration. Data Bases Used NFIRS provides annual computerized data bases of fire incidents, with data classified according to a standard format based on the NFPA 901 Standard. Roughly three-fourths of all states have NFIRS coordinators, who receive fire incident data from participating fire departments and combine the data into a state data base. These data are then transmitted to FEMAIUSFA. Participation by the states, and by local fire departments within participating states, is voluntary. NFIRS captures roughly one-third to one-half of all U.S. fires each year. More than one-third of all U.S. fire departments are listed as participants in NFIRS, although not all of these departments provide data every year. The strength of NFIRS is that it provides the most detailed incident information of any national data base not limited to large fires. NFlRS is the only data base capable of addressing national patterns for fires of all sizes by specific property use and specific fire cause. (The NFPA survey separates fewer than 20 of the hundreds of property use categories defined by NFPA 901 and solicits no cause-related information except for incendiary and suspicious fires.) NFlRS also captures information on the avenues and extent of flame spread and smoke spread and on the performance of detectors and sprinklers. The NFPA survey is based on a stratified random sample of roughly 3,000 U.S. fire departments (or just over one of every ten fire departments in the country). The survey includesthe following information: (1) the total number of fire incidents, civilian deaths, and civilian injuries, and the total estimated property damage (in dollars), for each of the major property use classes defined by the NFPA 901 Standard; (2) the number of on-duty firefighter injuries, by type of duty and nature of illness; and (3) information on the type of community protected (e.g., county versus township versus city) and the size of the population protected, which is used in the statistical formula for projecting national totals from sample results. The NFPA survey begins with the NFPA Fire Service Inventory, a computerized file of about 30,000 U.S. fire departments, which is the most complete and thoroughly validated such listing in existence. The survey is stratified by size of population protected to reduce the uncertainty of the final estimate. Small rural communities protect fewer people per department and are less likely to respond to the survey, so a large number must be surveyed to obtain an adequate sample of those departments. (NFPA also makes follow-up calls to a sample of the smaller fire departments that do not respond, to confirm that those that did respond are truly representative of fire departments their size.) On the other hand, large city departments are so few in number and protect such a large proportion of the total U.S. population that it makes sense to survey all of them. Most respond, resulting in excellent precision for their part of the final estimate.

Fireworks, 6/06

19

NFPA Fire Analysis and Research, Quincy, MA

Projecting NFIRS to National Estimates To project NFIRS results to national estimates, one needs at least an estimate of the NFIRS fires as a fraction of the total so that the fraction can be inverted and used as a multiplier or scaling ratio to generate national estimates from NFIRS data. But NFIRS is a sample from a universe whose size cannot be inferred from NFIRS alone. Also, participation rates in NFIRS are not necessarily uniform across regions and sizes of community, both of which are factors correlated with frequency and severity of fires. This means NFIRS may be susceptible to systematic biases. No one at present can quantify the size of these deviations from the ideal, representative sample, so no one can say with confidence that they are or are not serious problems. But there is enough reason for concern so that a second data base - the NFPA survey - is needed to project NFIRS to national estimates and to project different parts of NFIRS separately. This multiple calibration approach makes use of the annual NFPA survey where its statistical design advantages are strongest. There are separate projection formulas for four major property classes (residential structures, non-residential structures, vehicles, and other) and for each measure of fire severity (fire incidents, civilian deaths, and civilian injuries, and direct property damage). For example, the scaling ratio for 2002 civilian deaths in residential structures is equal to the total number of 2002 civilian deaths in residential structure fires reported to fire departments, according to the NFPA survey (2,695), divided by the total number of 2002 civilian deaths in residential structure fires reported to NFIRS (1,029). Therefore, the scaling ratio is 2,69511,029 = 2.62. The scaling ratios for civilian deaths and injuries and direct property damage are often significantly different from those for fire incidents. Except for fire service injuries, average severity per fire is generally higher for NFIRS than for the NFPA survey. Use of different scaling ratios for each measure of severity is equivalent to assuming that these differences are due either to NFIRS under-reporting of small fires, resulting in a higher-than-actual loss-perfire ratio, or possible biases in the NFIRS sample representation by region or size of community, resulting in severity-per-fire ratios characteristic only of the oversampled regions or community sizes. Note that this approach also means that the NFPA survey results for detailed property-use classes (e.g., fires in storage structures) may not match the national estimates of the same value. Calculating National Estimates of Particular Types of Fires Most analyses of interest involve the calculation of the estimated number of fires not only within a particular occupancy but also of a particular type. The types that are mostly frequently of interest are those defined by some ignition-cause characteristic. The six causerelated characteristics most commonly used to describe fires are: form of the heat that caused the ignition, equipment involved in ignition, form or type of material first ignited, the ignition factor that brought heat source and ignited material together, and area of origin. Other characteristics of interest are victim characteristics, such as ages of persons killed or injured in fire.
Fireworks,6106 20 NFPA Fire Analysis and Research, Quincy, MA

For any characteristic of interest in NFIRS, some reported fires have that characteristic unknown or not reported. If the unknowns are not taken into account, then the propensity to report or not report a characteristic may influence the results fgmore than the actual patterns on that characteristic. For example, suppose the number of fires remained the same for several consecutive years, but the percentage of fires with cause unreported steadily declined over those years. If the unknown-cause fires were ignored, it would appear as if fires due to every specific cause increased over time while total fires remained unchanged. This, of course, does not make sense. Consequently, most national estimates analyses allocate unknowns. This is done by using scaling ratios defined by NFPA survey estimates of totals divided-byonly those NFIRS fires for which the dimension in question was known and reported. This approach is equivalent to assuming that the fires with unreported characteristics, if known, would show the same proportions as the fires with known characteristics. For example, it assumes that the fires with unknown ignition factor contain the same relative shares of child-playing fires, incendiary-cause fires, short circuit fires, and so forth, as are found in the fires where ignition factor was reported.

Rounding Errors
The possibility of rounding errors exists in all our calculations. One of the notes on each table indicates the extent of rounding for that table, e.g., deaths rounded to the nearest one, fires rounded to the nearest hundred, property damage rounded to the nearest hundred thousand dollars. In rounding to the nearest one, functional values of 0.5 or more are rounded up and functional values less than 0.5 are rounded down. For example, 2.5 would round to 3, and 3.4 would round to 3. In rounding to the nearest one, a stated estimate of 1 could be any number from 0.5 to 1.49, a roughly threefold range. The im&ct of rounding is greatest when the stated number is small relative to the degree of rounding. As noted, rounding to the nearest one means that stated values of 1 may vary by a factor of three. Similarly, the cumulative impact of rounding error - the potential gap between the estimated total and the sum of the estimated values as rounded - is greatest when there are a large number of values and the total is small relative to the extent of rounding. Suppose a table presented 5-year averages of estimated deaths by item first ignited, all rounded to the nearest one. Suppose there were a total of 30 deaths in the 5 years, so the total average would be 30/5 = 6.

In case 1, suppose 10 of the possible items first ignited each accounted for 3 deaths in 5 years. Then there would be 10 entries of 3/5 = 0.6, rounded to 1, and the sum would be 10, compared to the true total of 6.

h case 2, suppose 15 of the possible items first ignited each accounted for 2 deaths in 5 years. Then there would be 15 entries of 215 = 0.4, rounded to 0, and the sum would be 0, compared to the true total of 6.

Fireworks. 6/06

21

NFPA Fire Analysis and Research, Quincy, MA

Here is another example: Suppose there were an estimate of 7 deaths total in 1992 through 1996. The 5-year average would be 1.4, which would round to 1, the number we would show as the total. Each death would represent a 5-year average of 0.2. If those 7 deaths split as 4 deaths in one category (e.g., smoking) and 3 deaths in a second category (e.g., heating), then we would show 4 x 0.2 = 0.8 deaths per year for smoking and 3 x 0.2 = 0.6 deaths per year for heating. Both would round to 1, there would be two entries of 1, and the sum would be 2, higher than the actual rounded total. If those 7 deaths split as 1 death in each of 7 categories (quite possible since there are 12 major cause categories), then we would show 0.2 in each category, always rounding to 0, and the sum would be 0, lower than the actual rounded total. The more categories there are, the farther apart the sum and total can -- and often do -- get. Note that percentages are calculated from unrounded values, and so it is quite possible to have a percentage entry of up to loo%, even if the rounded number entry is zero.

Fireworks, 6/06

22

NFPA Fire Analysis and Research, Quincy, MA

-

-

-

-

September 8,2U06

Mr.Todd Stevcnsan
O@ce of lhe Secretary

U.S. Cmsumer Product Sdety Commission 4330 East-Wwt Highway

Roam502 Bethesdn, MD 208 14

Re: COMMENTS ON FIREWORKS ANPR RY RI.ACK CAT FlREWORKS
Dcar M .S t c v m ; r
*

Black Cat Marketing, USA and Shiu FungF i w k s Co. Lld. (hereafter "Black Cat Fireworks" or "Black Catt') submit the following commcnts on the ANPR for Amendment to F i m w i h Safkty Standads. We r\.clcome the opjmnunity to submit comments on this imprtani issue.
We arc tbc largest distributors of c o m e r f i m r k s in the wrld and we ayrce with mandatory testing ofdl consumer firework. We c m t 1 y have a substantid testing pmlynm in place at all factories that manukture Black Cat@f i m r k s . This pragram is m o n i t d md audiled by Bu~eauVeritas w tcsl t tbc stan&& required by our cUStOMetS,The sbndards thot wc tcsl and e o to iaciudc CPSC, AFSI, DAM (the German Standard for h w r k s ) and thc Eumpcw StarJ;ud We would assume Lhat this testing pqpam would meet tlpt for mnndatory lesting set forth in the ANPR I swuld wrlwmc CPSC review ofaw &slingpmgtam k

~~

With regards to thc U.S. m a .we aee an averdl deuww in the freqmcy s injuries. Based f on statistics publbhed on the American Pyrotechnics Association wcbsilt. we would note that consumer fmorlc consulllption rose morc tban 54% (156.2 million pun& in 2000 vs. 236.2 million pounds in 2004)while the CPSC statistics on injuriesactually decreaEed (1 1.000 injuries in 2000 vs. 9,600 injuries in 2#4) by o v a 12% fw the same petiod of ti=. Wc bclkvc that Lhis irnpmvod safdy rccord refleas i)an increased concern for quality and d ' y by the Chinese g o m m t Pnd major firework expatten and importers, ii) tbF increased popularity of multishot products (which are more cxpensivc a d l s prom to mischief and abusc) and lastly iii) es the focus on safety inspircd by the AFSI,.

.

'%acrck

e t 4s the%t c

ycu c a get: ~
1

We commend the .4FSL for its focus on safcty and we acknowledge that the A B L s h d a d s arc the only votunt;srv written slmdards a1 lZlis time Tt the U.S. market. Nanetheless. we bclicvc o these stanbrrds are f l a d and w have serious concerns h i t should be addressed beforc Ihc AFSL standards can bc considcd for mmdoulry use.

I.

AkXL does not have a true certificationp o r m or c m a certificiuion mark; it is rga v merely a random tcsting pmgam. Since the AFSL mnrk is sirnpty a service mark to pmtecl thc design uf the mark and not a cerliflcstionthm is no guaranty of quality

of the produd.
2.

We have been testing to the AFSL standards but MT bctiwr: thsl many, if not mQst,af the standards have no scientific basis, haw not bten reviewed by expem and have not had my human factors analysis To our knowledge, the only human factors study rhal has cvcr been &nc is the h hum time study, and this was a study h a t was e required by CPSC. Following are just a few examples of AFSL standard-setdng practice that raise our l l of concern: m
a.

\Vc atlcndcd a CPSC I AFSL meeting in Bethesda in 20Q6 wbcxe John Raga Exccutivc IXeclor of AFSL, stated that hey got a portion of their standards ammiltee together over a weekend and drafted a standard for bamboo sparklers. T i is s mcularly egqiolrs exnmple of total lack of regard for dut diIiyence hs exhibited by AFSL in its staadand-setting practice. I3ccarrsc of this weekend effort widrout m industry f w k , cxpcn review or human fsctoss analysis, the y resulting standard fot h b e o sparklers i nmbiguous and o&rs no wncrtcc s guidelines. The d a t d for bamboo stick qmrklcrs 2-3.1 stacts"Waoden o r hambaa sticks m s be treated or m t c d in such a manner h L e will not ut t hy continue to burn as a result ofopcratioa" With this type of language i the n standard,teslers in the ficid haw trancadow leeway in determining if a product
passesorfailstbc~.

b. The section on Spialty Items is very ambiguous i thc &scriplion o f the devices n included in this section and is not b c i cnrbmd uniformly t h r o w u t the industry. For cxamplc ~ d o r 1-2.9states a fire~vrks that rcscmblcs in d item physical fonn anictes cammanly m g n k d as apgclrling 10 o a(lmdd for use r by children. This includes, but b not timited to, dcviccs that mernble cattoon charactem, toy& vchida, boats and animals and b an designated to produce l limits visible, audible o motion cffsb. Thme are pmductson the markct such as r B-2 Bomber (a plaec), M-45 Tank, Mega Cycle, Frieactship Pagoda Globe F h o r k s , Grand Prix Racer, Fire Engine and more chat clearly do not comply u4lh the a h standard,
c.

Ta our knowlcdgc thc rcquircmcnts for shell design of doadablc shcll kits has
a human fact~cs study dooe t prove that arcwork. Wemarks nose o cones,fins or otber designs cause consurnas fo consider Lhe shells as finished
M V C had ~

propcr way to I&

fm M devices. Designs and t r a d d may help guide thc consumer on the i v k the shell into hlaunch tuk.

d. The AFSL requirements for breakout chatge for serial items has been established wiihout any technical data lo sllow cause for the standard plus, because of thc different ways &at shells are made and fillers are used, the percatage of breakout can be gamed and an item that is on thc cusp ofcompliance can bc passcd or failcd.
e. The AFSL calh for testing o f multi-shot =rial dcviccs wt a tubc insidc diamdcr ih of p t e r than 1 imh to be subjected to a 2 inch mcdium dcnsity polyurPthane frwn t e s t This test has not been proven by experts to b a reliable test for e shooting thcsc dnicw on a soft surface and thcrc i no qxcifiw~ion "mdium s for density' of tbc foam

3.

The ambiguily ~ I Iof specific guidelines in the current AFSL standads rwult in I I& K a situation in which rnanukturers, exporters and importers c o n c d ~ 5 t h safety are faccd with high dcgrocs of uncertainty on wtrcthcr lheir products will U ~ A17SL n Wing. Because of the ambiguity of the standardo,w ~ e h a product batch "pasw" r is too dependent on the whims of the individual kster on that pcriticular day. I h n e meanlime, parties that are not that concerned with quality and safety can pamc thc system by taking advm&ge of the ambiguity to get poor pmducts passed.
We strongly bclicvc that produd slandards arrd the development of those mmdwds

4.

should bc sqmttc and distinct f i the product testing process. In most other product caQories, once product standaids have been developai and acccptcd. companies have a m r a of choices for thc testing process, including various third yid party t d n g agmcia. la tbc casc of the AFSL program, cornpies have no choice but to engagc the scrviccsof ITS.This lack of choice in third party testers i antis trade and can ba conducive lo an cnvimnment of mmption and lack of consistent quality of tcsting. ITS has no competition and i not held aocountablc for their tcsting s m c t h h . We have sea^ evidence of thisover the last several yean with mjor rccalls of r e ok product that wns tested by IT'S to AFSL s&ndads. If the AFSL standards uwr l wcrc to bc clcat and include specific guideline, processes and tolerances then any rrpulabk, independent third party testing agency should be ablc to twt to those

standtuds.
Thc AFSL Standards comprise 119 pahpsof infontdon on 12 different categories of l i d . For thc reasons stal#l above, we & nat believe the sumdads are god enough in their currmt f i to become a.fudntor~r a r d s . d
We recornmead the following actions that we believe will make the AFSL standards more rigorous and fair. and will ultimately Itad to better compliance and irnpmvcd d c t y in u m m m r

firework products:

I.

AFSL should canduct 8 full =view o f d of i& c u m 1 st;mdtuds. The review should be conducted by a team which includes both industry reprcsenlativcs and outside technical expcrts. W understand that thE AFSL standardscommiltcc is c c m n d y d c up af indus~ry government personnel, hut wbelieve tha~ and e there is not enough technical input i the committee. The review should include human n factors analysis, chemical and physical studies for each standard.
The S& U& should include specifications, guidelines, acccptllblc ptocwscs and maieriah~ ench standard along with tolerances, when and whcn: applicable. for

2.

3.

AFSL should dcvclop a rigorous proocss for dcvclopmcnt of fulun standit&. The process should include development guidelines, the rype of analysis needed to &ow -use for the sa* tn mnlysis ofreproducibility of test rcsults and a dctailcd description of the testing pmcss to bc pcrfonnd

4.

~ o u p lthe product standards from the testing proees by eliminating the t rcguimcnt to I t s t only through ITS. If the AFSL has full confidence in its s t m h k and Iht mtabilily of its stsndards then my third Iwty independentqency should bc
able lo ksl to the AFSL slamisrds.
a

If additional standards arc t bc incorponatcd by rcfetcnce in the CPSC regdnrionsthen we o s t lhal you consider APA 87-1 which is already imrporalrxl by refin PHMSA regulations at 49CFR Part 173.57(jW 1). If CPSC relies on any standards, eithcr APA 87- t or AFSL, they shuld be enforceable under Section 15 of the FHSA (15 USC W o n 1274).
Again, thank you fw thc opportunity to submit these written canmen&. We u ~ d welcome rhe d opportunity to provide oral testimony at any briefing conkacc on this AWR. W w o M also e a g h invite the CPSC staffto visit a Black Cat Fmorks fbctory atad ohewe our testing pmgam which h l k v c far cxc& chc AFSL testing propif& o any ITS testing r

Ralph -1

Resident Black Cat Marketing USA

CEN TC 212 (N363)
Date: 2002-08

p rEN 14035-5
CEN TC 212 (N363) Secretariat: NEN

Fireworks methods

- - Part 5: Batteries or combinations - Specification and test

ICS: 71.100.30 Descriptors: explosives. pyrotechnics

Document type: European Standard Document subtype: Document stage: CEN Enquiry Document language: E T:\Freweh\881 Feuerwerk\norm\14035-05\prEN14035-5 (N 363) Batteries or combinations (E).doc STD VersiOn 2.0

I:

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

Contents
' l
2

Scope

........................................................................................................................................................... 4 Normative references ................................ . ; ............................................................................................... 5

3

...........................................................................................................................5 Construction .............................................................................................................................................. 5 Means of ignition........................................................................................................................................... 5 Attachment of initial fuse ........................................................................................................................... 6 Protection of initial fuse .................................... .......................................................................................... 6 ........................................................................................ 6 General ................................................................ lnitlai fuse protected by fuse cover ...................................................................................................... 6 lnltial fuse protected by prlmary pack or selection pack..........................................................................6 Protruding fuse deslgned to resist side ignition ....................................................................................... 6 Materials of firework case ........................................................................................................................... 6
Terms and definitions
?

......................................................................................................................................................... 6 ................................................................................................................................................ 6 .................................................................................................................................7 ...............................................................................................................................7 ............................................................................................................ 7 .............................................................................................................. 7 ................................................................................................................... 7 ............................................................................................................................................7 ............................................................................................................................................ 7 Performance .................................................................................................................................................. 7 inltlai fuse ....................................................................................................................................................... 7 Prlnclpai effects ............................................................................................................................................ 8 Functioning.......................... ........................................................................................................................ 8 . Explosions and other failures ......................................................................................................................8 Sound pressure level .................................................................................................................................... 8 Burnlng matter............................................................................................................................................... 8 Projected Debris ............................................................................................................................................ 8 Mass of fallout ..........................................................................................................................................8 Height of explosions or bursting (rockets and shells-in-mortars only) .................................................. 8 Angle or deviation of flight ....................................................................................................................... 9 Means for stabilization of flight. (if applicable)...........................................................................................9 Stability .................... . ............................................................................................................................ .. . after. functioning.........................................................................................9 . . integrity of the flrework case 9 Burning rate of pyrotechnlc composition (bengal flame only) ................................................................ 9
integrity Firework case Battery or comblnatlon Net explosive content Category 2 battery or comblnatlon Category 3 battery or combination Cailbre (shells-in-mortars only) Launching tubes Vertical Stablilty Primary pack or selection pack Minimum Iabeiilng requirements General Type name and category Safetv Information General Category 2 batteries or combinations Category 3 batterles or combinations Placlng Instructions Name, address and telephone number of manufacturer or distributor or importer Reference to this standard Prlnting Labelling Type size Marking of very small batteries and comblnatlons Reduced size

6

................................................................................................................... 9 ........................................................................................................... 9 .......................................................................................................................................................... 9 ............................................................................................................................. 9 ....................................................................................................................................... 10 .........................................................................................................................................................10 ...................................................................................................... 10 ...................................................................................................... 10 .................................................................................................................................... 10 .......................... 11 .........................................................................................................................1.1 .................................................................................................................................................... 11 ....................................................................................................................................................... 11 ...................................................................................................................................................... 19 ...............................................................................11 ............................................................................................................................................... .1 1

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

7.7.2 7.8

...................................................................................................................................12 ........ .........-......... 12 ........... Methods of test ............................................................................................................................................. 12 Attachment of protruding fuse (type test and batch test) ....................................................................... 12 Apparatus ..................................................................................................................................................... 12 Procedure ..................................................................................................................................................... 12 13 Vertlcal stability test (type test).................................................................................................................. Apparatus ..................................................................................................................................................... 13 Procedure ..................................................................................................................................................... 13 Performance (type test and batch test) ..................................................................................................... 13 Test environment .................................... ................................................................................................... 13 .. Procedure ....................................................................................................................... ......... ..................... 17 Inclination of launching tube(if applicable) (type test and batch test) ................................................... 19 .. Procedure .................................... ... .................................................................................... i.................. 19 Calibre (if applicable) (type test and batch test) ......................................................................................A 9 Apparatus ..................................................................................................................................................... 19 Test speclmen .............................................................................................................................................. 19 Procedure .................................................................................................................................................. 19 Determlnatlon of net explosive content (type test) .................................................................................. 19 Apparatus ................................................................................................................................................. .1 .9 Test specimen .............................................................................................................................................. 19 Procedure ..................................................................................................................................................... 19 Side ignition of initial fuse (type test) ....................................................................................................... 20 Material.......................................................................................................................................................... 20 20 8.7.2 Test area ....................................................................................................................................................... 8.7.3 Apparatus .......................... . . ..................................................................................................................... 20 8.7.4 Test specimen ................................................ ......................................................................................... . . 20 8.7.5 Procedure ..................................................................................................................................................20 .. . 8.8 Labelling (type test and batch test)............................................................................................................22 Annex A (normative) Type testing ........................................................................................................................... 23 A.1 General.......................................................................................................................................................... 23 A2 Number of batteries or comblnatlons to be tested................................................................................... 23 A.3 Loose pyrotechnlc compositlon .................................................................................................................24 A.4 Thermal condltloning................................................................................................................................. 24 A.5 Mechanical conditlonlng ............................................................................................................................ 24 A.5.1 Apparatus .................... ............................................................................................................................ . . 24 A.5.2 Procedure .................................................................................................................................................... 28 A.6 Number of primary packs or seiectlon packs to be examined................................................................ 29 A.7 Test report .............................. : .................................................................................................................. 29
Reduced Information Additional information on the primary pack or selection pack (If appllcable) Annex B lnormatlvel Batch testlna General Sampllng plans Unit of product Nonconformlties Test report Acceptance or rejection of a batch Nonconforming units Critlcai nonconforming unlts MaJor nonconforming units Minor nonconformlng nits Batterlee and combinations supplied in units Annex D (informative) A-Devlatlons

......................................................................................................................... 33 . ............................. ........................................................................................................................... 33 ............................................................................................................................................. 33 ............................................................................................................................................ 33 ........................................................................................................................................... 33 .................................................................................................................................................... 35 .......................................................................................................... 35 ................................................................................................................................... 35 ......................................................................................................................35 ........................................................................................................................ 35 .......................................................................................................................... 35 .......................................................................................... 36

Annex C (normative) Method for determination of smouldering rate of cigarette

............................................ 37

........................................................................................................................ 38

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

Foreword

This document (prEN 14035-32002) has been prepared by Technical Committee CENfrC 212, 'Fireworks', the secretariat of which is held by NEN. In this European Standard the Annexes A to C are normative and the Annex D Is informative and contains national devlations due to regulations, the slteration of which is for the time belng outside the competence of the CENICENELEC member.

1

Scope

(i

This European Standard speclfle~requirements for the construction, performance. packaging and labelling of batterles or combinations and the corresponding test methods. It is applicable to fireworks which are classified as batteries or combinations In categories 2 and 3 according to ptEN 14035-2. It is applicable to category 2 batterles or combinations containing fireworks listed in prEN 14035-2 and which comply with the requirements of categories I and 2. It is applicable to category 3 batterles or combinations containing fireworks llsted in prEN 14035-2 and which comply with the requirements of categories I,2 and 3. It is not applicable to category 2 batterles or combinations containing fireworks listed In prEN 14035-2 and which comply with the requlrements of category 3. It is not appllcable to assembled percussion caps, banger batteries or flash banger batteries. It is not applicable to batteries or combinations containing pyrotechnic wmposifion that Includes any of the following substances: arsenic or arsenic compounds; lead or lead compounds; mercury compounds; mixtures containing a mass fraction of more than 80 % of chlorates; mixtures of chlorates with metals; mixtures of chlorates with red phosphorous; mixtures of chlorates with potassium hexacyanoferrate(l1); mixtures of chlorates with sulphur; mixtures of chlorates with sulphides; white phosphorous; plcrates or picric acid; potassium chlorate with a mass fraction of more than 0,15 % bromates; sulfur with an acidity (as H2SO4)greater than 0,002 %; 4

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

zirconium with a parlicle size less than 40 ym.
NOTE

In prEN 14035-2, batteries or combinatlons are classlfled as follows:

-

Brief description:

-

Battery: assembly including several elements, each of the same type and corresponding to one of the types of firework listed in prEN 14035-2, with one point of ignition; Combination: assembly including several elements, not all of the same type, each corresponding to one of the types of firework listed in prEN 14035-2, with one point of ignition;

Principal effects: as for the individual elements.

Schemes for type testing of batteries or combinatlons and batch testlng of batteries or comblnations are specified in Annex A and Annex B respectively.

2

Normative references

This European Standard incorporates by dated or undated reference, provisions from other publications. These normative references are cited at the appropriate places in the text and the publications are listed hereafter. For dated references, subsequent amendments to or revlslons of any of these publications apply to this European Standard only when incorporated in it by amendment or revision. For undated references the latest edition of the publication referred to applies (including amendments). : prEN 14035-1, Fireworks - Part 1 Terminology. prEN 14035-2. Fireworks - Part 2 Categorisatlon. :

EN 60651, Sound level meters. EN IS0 845, Cellularplastics and rubbers -Determination of apparent (bulk) denslty. (IS0 8453988)
EN I S 0 868, Plastlcs and ebonite Hardness). (IS0 868.3 985)

- Determination of indentation hardness by means of a dummeter (Shore

EN ISOllEC 17025, General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories. (ISOIIEC 17025:1999) IS0 2439, Flexible cellular polymeric materials 24393997, including Technical Corrigendum 1:1998)

- Determination of -

hardness (indentation technique). (IS0

IS0 2859-1, Sampling procedures for inspection by attributes Part 1 Sarnpllng schemes indexed by acceptance : quality limit (AQL) for lot-by-lot Inspection. (IS0 2589:f999, including Technicai Comigendum 1:2001) IS0 3599, Vernier callipers, readlng to 0,1 end 0,05 mrn. (IS0 3599:1976)

3

Terms and deflnitions

For the purposes of this European Standard, in addition the terms and definitions given in prEN 14035-1 apply.

4

Construction

4.1 Means of lgnltlon
The means of ignition shall be identified by a protruding fuse. Conformity to this requirement shall be verified by visual examination.

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

4.2 Attachment o f inltlal fuse
The attachment of the protrudlng fuse to the battery or combination shall be secure when tested In accordance with
8.1.

4.3 Protection of lnltial fuse
4.3.1

General

or The initial fuse shall be protected in one of the ways specified in 4.3.2,4.3.3 4.3.4.
4.3.2

lnltlal fuse protected by fuse cover

An orange fuse cover shall be in place over the lnitlal fuse. Conformity to this requirement shall be verified by visual examlnatlon.
4.3.3

Initial fuse protected by prlrnary pack or selection pack

The battery or comblnation shall be contained in a prlrnary pack or selection pack complying with clause 6. Conformity to this requirement shall be verlfied by vlsual examlnatlon.
4.3.4

Protruding fuse designed t o resist side Ignition

When tested In accordance with 8.7, the protruding fuse shall not ignite.

4.4 Materials o f firework case
The body of the firework case shall be made of paper, cardboard or plastics. The other components in the assembly, excluding staples, means of fixing, and binding wires and rocket tubes containing the propellant charge, shall be made of paper, cardboard, wood or plastics. Rocket tubes containing the propellant charge, if any, shall be made of paper, cardboard, plastics or sheathed alurninlum. If the end closures are separate components, they shall be made of non-metalllc material. These requirements apply to each Individual element and pyrotechnic unit. The base and/or means of fixing shall be made of non-metallic material. Conformity to this requirement shall be verified by visual examination.

4.5 lntegrlty
4.5.1
Flrework case

There .shall be no holes, splits, dents or bulges in the body of the firework case, except those technlcaily necessary for the correct functioning of the battery or comblnation. There shall be no holes or splits In the end closures. If the end closure, If any, Is a separate component, it shall be securely in place. These requirements apply to each individual element and pyrotechnlc unlt. If the base Is a separate component, It shall be securely in place. Conformlty to these requirements shall be verlficjd by visual examination.

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

4.5.2

Battery or comblnatlon

When tested in accordance with clause A.5, the mass of loose pyrotechnic compositlon shall not exceed 100 mg.

4.6 Net explosive content
4.6.1

Category 2 battery or comblnatlon

When determtned in accordance with 8.6, a category 2 battery or combination shall have a net exploslve content of not more than 200,O g. Each report charge and whistling charge, if any shall conform to the requirements of the Individual elernents. When determined in accordance with 8.6, the net explosive content of each pyrotechnic unit or element shall conform to the requirements as for the individual elements. Each report charge and whistling charge, if any shall conform to the requirements of the individual elements.
4.6.2

Category 3 battery or comblnatlon

When determined in accordance with 8.6, a category 3 battery or combination shall have a net explosive content of not more than 1000,O g or, if the battery or combination contains shells-in-mortars, not more than 500,O g or, if the battery or combination contains rockets, not more than 300,O g. When determined in accordance with 8.6, the net explosive content of each pyrotechnic unit or element, except shells-In-mortars, shall conform to the requirements as for the indlvldual elements. When determined in accordance with 8.6, the net explosive content of each shell-in-mortar, shall have a net explosive content of not more than 200,O g.

4.7 Calibre (shells-in-mortars only)
When measured in accordance with 8.5, the inside diameter of the mortar of the shell-in-mortar shall not exceed I05 mm.

4.8 Launching tubes
When measured In accordance with 8.4, the inclination of each launching tube for pyrotechnic units, except mortars and launching tubes for rockets, shall be not more the 15" from the vertical.
NOTE;

Launching tubes for rockets and mortars of shell-in-mortarsshall not be inclined.

(

4.9 Vertlcal Stablllty
Batteries or combinations designed to be placed on the ground, shall not fall over when tested in accordance with 8.2.

5

Performance

5.1 lnitlal fuse
When tested in accordance with 8.3, the initial fuse shall ignite within 10 s and the ignition shall be visible. For category 2 batteries or combinations the duration of the initial fuse burning shall be 3,O s lo 8,O s, when tested in accordance with 8.3. For category 3 batteries or combinations, the duration of the initial fuse burning shall be 5,O s to 13,O s, when tested in accordance with 8.3.

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

5.2 Prlnclpal effects
When tested In accordance with 8.3, the principal effect of the batteries or wmbhalions, as given in prEN 14035-2, shall be as that for each firework type within the assembly.

5.3 Functlonlng
When tested in accordance with 8.3, all elements or pytotechnic units of a battery or combinallon shall function completely.

5.4 Explosions and other fallures
When tested in accordance with 8.3, the battery or combination shall not produce an explosion, other than from an intended effect, or rupture during functioning.

5.5 Sound pressure level
('

(:

When tested in accordance wilh 8.3, a category 2 battery or combination shall produce an maximum A-weighted impulse sound pressure level (LAlmax) not higher than 120 dB(AI) at a horizontal distance of 8,O m from the of testing point and at a helght of 1,O m above the ground. When tested in accordance with 8.3, a category 3 battery or combination shall produce an maximum A-weighted Impulse sound pressure level (LAlmax)of not hlgher than 120 dB(AI) at a horizontal dlstance of 15,O rn from the testing polnt and at a helght of 1,0 m above the ground.

5.6 Burning matter
When tested in accordance with 8.3, no burning or lncandescent matter from a category 2 battery or combination shall fall to the ground more than 6,O m from the testing point. When tested in accordance with 8.3, no burning or incandescent matter from a category 3 battery or combination shall fall to the ground more than 15,O m from the testlng polnt. When tested in accordance wlth 8.3, any burning or Incandescent matter, other than matter resulting form effects concomitant wlth ascent, from a rocket or a shell of a shell-in-mortar, shall be extingulshed at least 10 m above the ground. When tested in accordance with 8.3, any flames caused by the functioning of the battery or cumbination shal[ be extinguished withln 60,O s of the battery or combination ceasing to functlon.

(.

5.7 Projected Debris
When tested in accordance with 8.3, no debris from a category 2 battery or combination shall be projected laterally more than 8,O rn from the testing point and any particle of debris which Is projected laterally more than 8,0 rn from the testing polnt shall not exceed a mass of 1,O g. When tested in accordance with 8.3, no debris from a category 3 battery or combination shall be projected laterally more than 15,O rn from the testing point.

5.8 Mass of fallout
When tested in accordance with 8.3, the mass of any particle of debris whlch results from the functioning of a pytotechnic unit which Is projected upwards from a battery or combination, If any, shall conform to the requirements of the indlvlduai elements.

5.9 Height of exploslons or bursting (rockets and shells-in-mortars only)
When tested in accordance with 8.3, no explosion shall occur, and the rockets or the shell of the shell-in-mortar shall not burst, below a height of 20 m.

8

prEN 14035-52002 (E)

5.10 Angle or deviation o f fllght
When tested in accordance with 8.3, the angle or the deviation of flight of each element or pyrotechnic unit of a battery or combination shall conform to the requirements as for the indlvldual elements, If any.

5.11 Means for stablllzatlon o f fllght (If applicable)
When tested in accordance with 8.3, the means for stabillzatlon of flight shall not become detached before the principal effects, other than ascent, occur.

5.1 2 Stability
When tested in accordance wlth 8.3, a battery or combination shall remain uprlght or flxed whilst functioning.

5.13 lntegrlty o f t h e flrework case after functioning
When tested in accordance with 8.3, any firework case of each individual element of a battery or cornbinatlon shall conform to the requirements as for the individual elements.

(.

(

5.14 B u r n i n g rate o f pyrotechnic composltlon (bengal flame only)
When tested In accordance with 8.3 the pyrotechnic composition shall have a burning rate of more than 60,O s for 100,O g of pyrotachnic composition.

6

P r l m a r y pack or

selection pack

If a primary pack or selection pack is required to protect the initial fuse@) of the battery (batteries) or corn bination(s) (see 4.3.3),the pack shall completely enclose the battery (batteries) or combination(s) and there shall be no holes or splits in the pack, except they are intended to open the packaging or othewise technically necessary. Conformlty to these requirements shall be verified by visual examination.

7

Mlnlrnurn labelling r e q u i r e m e n t s

7.1 General
Batteries and combinations and their packs, if any, shall be marked with the lnformatlon specified in 7.2 to 7.5 and, if relevant, 7.7 andor 7.8.
The specified information shall be given In the language@) of the country in which the batteries or combinations or packs are offered for retail sale. For each language, it shall be presented as a whole and shall not be interrupted by other text. Additional text given In another language shall not conflict with the specified information.

Conformity to the requirements specifled in 7.1 to 7.5. 7.6.1, 7.7.2 and 7.8 shall be verified by visual examination.
NOTE!

Examples of typical labels for bangers, for whlch many of the marking requlrements are similar to those specified for batteries and comblnatians In thls standard, are glven In prEN 14035-4.

7.2 Type name a n d category
'The type name shall be marked, in upper case, as 'BATTERY' or 'COMBINATION'. If a trade name Is used In addition to the type name, it shall not conflict with the effect of a battery or a combination or with the name of another type of firework. The appropriate category shall be marked, in upper case, as 'CATEGORY 2' or 'CAT 2',for example.

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

7 3 Safety information .
7.3.1

General

Safety information shall be emphaslzed by use of a heading, or bold type, or similar. If necessary, instructions In addition to those specified in 7.3.2 to 7.3.4 may be given.
7.3.2

Category 2 batterles or comblnattons

Labelling shall include at least the following safety informatlon in the order as follows:

(

'For outdoor use only'; 'Avoid overhead obstructions'l); 'Remove orange fuse cover'l);

Specific placing instructions for different types of batterles or combinations, inserted as approprlate (see 7.3.4); 'Standing sideways. light fuse at its outermost end and retire immediately at least 8 m'. Category 3 batterles or comblnations

7.3.3

Labelling shall include at least the following safety information in the order as follows:

-

'For outdoor use only'; 'Avoid overhead obstructions"l); 'Remove orange fuse cover'l);

i (

Specific placing lnstructlons for dlfferent types of battery or combination, inserted as appropriate (see 7.3.4); 'Standing sideways, light fuse at its outermost end and retlre ImmediatelY; 'Spectators must be at least 25 m away'; 'Operator must retire at least 15 m'. Placing lnstructlons

7.3.4

For battehs or combinations lo be placed on flat ground:

-

'Place battery on flat groundI2); or 'Place combination on flat ground").

-

For batterles or combinations to be burled Into soft ground or materlai: 'Insert battery upright in soft ground or other non-flammable material, e.g, sand12); or 'Insert combination upright in soft ground or other non-flammable material, e.g. sand12).

For batteries or comblnations to be fixed to a post:

'1 If applicable.
2) Whichever is appropriate.

10

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

-

'Fix battery firmly and uprlght to a solid post'; 'Ensure top of battery clears post'2)

'Fix combination firmly and upright to a solld post'; 'Ensure top of combination clears post'2),

-

7.4 Name, address and telephone number of manufacturer or distributor or Importer
Labelling shall include:

-

the name or trade mark, the address and the telephone number of the manufacturer; or

an abbrevlatlon or a code allowing the identification of the manufacturer, and the name or trade mark, the address and the telephone number of his authorized distributor; or if the manufacturer is not established in a CEN member country, of the importer in a CEN member country.

The address shall comprise at least the town and the country. On the battery or combination at least the abbreviations allowing the ldentlflcatlon

.

of the manufacturer; or of the distributor or importer, with an addltlonal code or abbreviation for the manufacturer

shall be marked.

7.5 Reference to this standard
A battery or combination shall be marked with 'prEN 14035-5'. A pack shall be marked with the words 'Contents conform to prEN 14035-5'.

7.6 Prlntlng

LabeHlng shall be clearly visible, easily legible, indelible and on a single-colour background,
NOTE:

Prlnling errors whlch are not misleading should not be classlfled as faulls.

7.6.2

Type slze

When measured in accordance with 8.8, the type sizes shall be such that the helght of h e character 'X' (in upper case) is at least 2,8 mm for the information speclfled In 7.2, 7.3 and 7.8 and at least 2,l mm for the other informatlon.

7.7 Marklng of very small batteries and cornbinatlons
7.7.1

Reduced slze

If the batteries or the combinations do not provide enough space for the specified informatlon using the types sizes specified In 7.6.2, for the Information specified in 7.2 and 7.3 the type size shall be reduced to 2,l mrn.

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

7.7.2

Reduced Information

If the batteries or the combinations do not provide enough space to carry all the specified information even in reduced type size, at least the lnformaflon specified In 7.4 shall be given on the firework, if at all possible.

7,8 Additional information on the primary pack or selection pack (if applicable)
If the battery or the combination is not labelled completely with the information specified in 7.2 to 7.5, or If the pack acts as protection of the initial fuses according to 4.3.3, the battery or the comblnatlon shall only be sold in a pack. The pack shall be marked with the statement

,

'Must be sold as packaged'. This statement shall appear adjacent to the type name or category. For the printing 7.6 applies.

8

Methods of test

(
(

NOTE: Verification of conformlty to the requlrements In 4.1, 4.3.2 or 4.3.3, 4.4, 4.5.1, 4.9 clause 6, 7.1 to 7.5, 7.6.1, 7.7.2 and 7.8 Is by visual examination.

8.1 Attachment of protruding fuse (type test and batch test)
8.1.1 8.1.1.1 8.1.1.2 8.1.1.3 8.1.2

Apparatus
Means of clamping the battev or combination. Weight, of mass 100. Timing device, readable to the nearest 0 , l s,

Procedure

Clamp the battery or combination by means of the clamping device (8.1.1.1) in a position such that the protruding fuse. Securely attach the 100 g welght (8.1.1.2) to the Initial fuse. Uslng the timing device (8.1.1.3), determine and record, whether Ihe protruding fuse will supporl the weight for at least 10 s without becornlng detached. If the protruding fuse becomes detached do not proceed with further testing of that battery or cornbinatlon.

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

8.2 Vertical stability test (type test)
8.2.1 8.2.1.I 8.2.1.2 8.2.2

Apparatus Wooden block, rectangular, with an upper surface inclined at 1D" to the horizontal. Timing device, readable to the nearest 0,l s. Procedure

8.2.2.1 Place the base of the battery or combination on the incllned surface of the wooden block (8.2.1.1). For polygonal (triangular, etc.) bases, align one edge of the base with the top edge of the wooden block. 8.2.2.2 Using the timing device (8.2.1.2), observe and record whether the baflery or combinations falls over within 5 s. If it falls over discontinue the test. 8.2.2.3

Rotate the battery or cornbinatlon clockwise through 90" and repeat the obse~ation described in 8.2.2.2. Repeat the operations described in 8.2.2.3 twice more (unless the battery or combination falls over).

(

8.2.2.4

8.3 Performance (type test and batch test)
8.3.1

Test environment

8.3.1.1 Test area for cetegofy 2 batteries or combinations. The test area shall be an outdoor site, on level ground, with a radius of at least 7 rn and a smooth, hard, horizontal, sound-reflecting, non-flammable surface (for example concrete). Two circles, radius 6,O and 8,O m shall be marked around the centre of the test area.

If applicable, two positions for monitorlng the height of ascent and the angle of flight shall be provided, at a measured disfance of at least 50 m from the testlng point (in the centre of the test area) and at 90"to each other In relation to the testlng point. If the rnonitorlng positions and the testlng point are not In the same horizontal plane, appropriate corrections shall be made in the calculation of heights. Test area for category 3 batteries or combinations, The test area shall be an outdoor site, on level 8.3.1.2 ground, with a radius of at least I 6 m and a smooth, hard, horizontal, sound-reflecting, non-flammable surface (for example concrete). A circle, radlus 15,O m, shall be marked around the centre of the test area.

(

(.

If applicable, two positions for monitoring the helght of ascent and the angle of flight, as describe in 8.3.1.1, shall be provided.

prEN 14035-52002 (E)

8.3.1,3 Wind speed. A means of rneasurlng the wind speed at a height of I,5 m above the ground shall be provlded. No performance testing shall be carried out if the wind speed exceeds 5,O rn/s. 8.3.2 8.3.2.1 8.3.2.2

Apparatus
Timing device, suitable of displaying at least one intermediate time, readable to the nearest 0,l s. Timing device, readable to the nearest 0,l s. Ignition source, capable of producing a small flame or of smouldering.

8.3.2.3
8.3.2.4

Sound level mefer (for type testing only), conforming to Type Iof EN 60651 with a free flekl microphone.

Means for monitoring the helght of ascent, bursting height and h e angle of flight, capable of indicating 8.3.2.5 deviations of the flight of 15" and (for batch testing only) 30" from the vertical at a height of 20 rn. Two'such items of apparatus are required.
Note: A sultable viewing screen Is shown in Figure 1 and the principle of is use is shown in Figure 2. The same device is also Illustrated in prEN 14035-30for monitoring the flight of shells.

Distance x is given, in millimetres, by the equation:

Where y Is the distance, in m, from the viewing point to the testing point (see Figure 2). The observer is positioned so that the bottom edge of the trlangle on the front screen coincides with the base of the rocket and the bottom edge of the black screen coincides with the bottom edge of the horizontal tape on the front screen.

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

All dimensions are in mi[llmetre

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

Key
1
2

Acrylic glass Black tape, 10 mm to 20 mm wide Solid base Stand
Figure 1 -Viewing screen

3

4

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

I 2
3

Base of battery or cornbinatlon before firing Sighting devlce Position of observer Figure 2 Use of a vlewing screen to monitor a helght of 20 m

-

8.3.2.6
NOTE!

Means for monitoring the height offallout, capable of Indicating vertlcel heights of 5 m and 10 rn.

A vertical height of 5 m can be indicaled by 5 rn poles around the edge of the test erea and the 10 m helght can be estimated using the same poles.

8.3.2.7
8.3.2.8

Measuring device, capable of measuring a height of 1,O rn to the nearest 10 mm. Laboratory balance, capable of weighing to the nearest 0 , l g. Procedure Measure and record the wind speed (see 8.3.1.3).

8.3.3

8.3.3.1

8332 ... If carrying a type test and if applicable, set up the microphone of the sound level meter (8.3.2.4) in the I at test area (8.3.1 . or 8.3.1.2), a height of 1,Om above the ground, determined by the measuring device (8.3.2.7), and at a horizontal distance from the testing point of 8,Om for category 2 batterles or comblnatlons or 1 5 0 m for category 3 batteries or combinations. If the aural effed will be produced on the ground, direct the microphone horizontally, towards the testing point and if necessary conned it to the sound level meter.
If the aural effect will be produced in the air, direct the microphone with an angle of 45" upwards towards the testing point.

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

Place the battery or combinatlon, in accordance wlth the instructions on the label in the centre ofthe test 8.3.3.3 area. Remove the orange fuse cover, if any, and straighten the initial fuse, if necessary. Apply the Ignition source (8.3.2.3) and at the same instant, start the timing device (8.3.2.1). Stop the intermediate time at the moment the protruding fuse ignites. If the Initial fuse falls to ignite within 10 s do not proceed with further testing of that battery or combinatlon. Otherwise stop the timing device when the battery or combination starts to produce its first principal effect, If the battery or comblnation contains any bengal flames, start the second timing device (8.3.2.2) at the moment the bengal flame starts to produce coloured flames and stop the timing device at the moment the bengal flame ceased to function. Record whether the initial fuse ignited within 10 s and whether the ignition of the initial fuse was visible. Record the duration of the initial fuse burnlng. Observe and record the prlncipal effects produced by the 8.3.3.4 battery or cornblnatlon. Obserye and record whether the battery or combination explodes, other than from an intended effect.

i
(.

Observe and record whether the battery or comblnatlon remains fixed or upright whilst functioning. After the battery or combination has ceased to function start the timing device (8.3.2.1) Immediately and record whether any flames caused by the functioning of the battery or combination are extinguished within 60,O s after the battery or combination has ceased to function. If applicable, observe and record whether any means for stabilization of flight becomes detached before the prlncipal effects, other than ascent occurred. Observe and record whether any burning or incandescent matter fell to the ground at a distance of more than 0,O m, for a category 2 battery or comblnation, or 15,O m, for a category 3 battery or combination, from the testlng point. Observe and record whether any debris is projected laterally more than 8,O m, for a category 2 battery or comblnatlon, or 15,O m, for a category 3 battery or comblnatlon, from the testlng point.
8.3.3.5 If carrying out a type test of a battery or combination with aural effect, record the maximum A-weighted Impulse sound pressure level, as measured by the sound level meter (8.3.2.4). 8.3.3.6 If the battery or comblnatlon contains any rocket, observe from both monitorlng positions, using the means for monitoring ascent (8.3.2.5), and record whether the angle of flight of the rocket exceeded 15" to the verlical at a height of 20 m or 30' for batch testing.

I'
(.

If the battery or combination contains any rocket or shell-in-mortar, observe from both monitoring positions, using the means for monitoring ascent (8.3.2.5), and record whether the whether the rocket or the shell explodes or bursts at a height of less than 20 m above the ground. If the battery or combination contains any element which projects pyrotechnic units upwards, observe from both monitoring positions, uslng the means for monitoring the height of fallout (8.3.2.6), and record whether any burning or Incandescent matter falls below a helght of 5 m from the ground, for a category 2 battery or comblnation, or below a helght of 10 m from the ground, for a category 3 battery or combination, before it is extinguished.
8.3.3.7 After the battery or combinatlon has ceased to function, and if appropriate, for a category 2 battery or combination, collect and weigh indivldually, to the nearest 0,l g using the balance (8.3.2.8), any particle of debris which might exceed a mass of 1,O g and which has fallen to the ground between the 6,O m radius circle and the 8,O m radius clrcle. Record whether any such particle of debrls has a mass of more than 1,O g.

Afler the battery or combination has ceased to function, and If appropriate, collect and welgh individually, to the nearest 0,l g using the balance (8.3.2.8), any particle of debris which results from the functioning of a pyrotechnic unit which was projected upwards from the battery or combination.

prEN 14035-52002 (E)

8.3.3.8 After functioning examine the battery or combinatlon visually and determine and record whether the battery or combination and all elements or pyrotechnlc units have functioned completely and whether the Integrity of any firework case conforms to lhe requirements as for the individual elements. 8.3.3.9 If the battery or combination contains any bengal flame, estimate the burnlng rate in seconds per 100 g of the pyrotechnic composition by dividing the measured burning tlme in seconds of the pyrotechnlc composition of the bengal flame by the net explosive content in grams of the bengal flame, determined In accordance with 8.6 and multiplying thls resull with 100. Record the burnlng rate.

8.4 lnclinatlon o f launchlng fube(if applicable) (type test and batch test)
8.4.1 8.4.1 . I 8.4.1.2

Apparatus Precision sliding bevel. Bevel protractor, reading to 1" Procedure

(

8.4.2

i

Carefully remove the firework case from a battery or combination. Place the battery or combination on a smooth, levelled surface (e.g. tabletop). Duplicate the angle the angle of the launching tube, if any, by pressing one leg of the sliding bevel (8.4.1-1) lowards the levelled surface and the other leg towards the outside of the launching tubet. Lock both legs by tlghten the fixing screw. Using lhe bevel protractor (8.4.1.2) measure the angle between both legs. Record the angle. Record whether any launchlng tube for a rocket or any mortar of a shell-in-mortar was inclined.

8.5 Callbre (If applicable) (type test and batch test)
8.5.1

Apparatus Vernier callipers, reading to 0,l mm, mnformlng to I S 0 3599. Test specimen

8.5.1.1
8.5.2

)

Use the battery or combination obtalned from the measurement of the inclination of launchlng tube (8.4) or from the determlnation of the net explosive content (8.6).
8.5.3

Procedure

Using the callipers (8.5.1.I), measure the inside diameter of the mortar. Record the diameter.

8.6 Determination o f net explosive content (type test)
8.6.1 8.6.1 .I 8.6.2

Apparatus Laboretoty balance, capable of weighing to the nearest 0,01 g. Test specimen

if present, use the battery or combination obtained from the measurement of the inclination of launching tube (8.4).

8 6 3 Procedure ..
Carefully dismantle a battery or combination. Separate the protruding fuse and retain this for the side ignition test (8.7). Separate any pyrotechnic unit and count them. Record lhe number of pyrotechnic units.

prEN 14035-32002 (E)

Separate any pyrotechnic unit containing report compositlon, if any, and count them. Record the number of pyrotechnic units containing report composition. Remove the pyrotechnic composition from each pyrotechnic unit and weigh each portion of pyrotechnic cornpositlon separately, to the nearest 0,l g, using the balance (8.6.1.1). Record the masses, the total mass of report composition, If any, and the net explosive content of the battery or combination.

8.7 Side ignltion of lnitlal fuse (type test)
8.7.1

Material

8.7.1.1 Cigarette, untipped, of length (70 4) mm, diameter (8,O k 0 3 ) mm and mass (1,O f 0,l) g, and having a smouldering rate of (9,5 .k 3,O)min over 40 mm distance when determined in accordance with Annex C. 8.7.2

*

Test area

'

The test area shall be a flat, horizontal, non-flammable surface Inside a fume cupboard, or similar enclosed space, whlch is capable of preventing movement of air. A means of extracting fumes shall be provided but this shall be switched off durlng the test.
8.7.3 8.7.3.1 8.7.4

(
Apparatus Three wire supports, (2,O f 0,l) mm diameter, approximately 50 mm long. Test speclmen

Use the initial fuse obtalned by dismantling the combination for the determination of net explosive content (8.6).
8.7.5

Procedure

Ignite the cigarette (8.7.1.1) and rest it horizontally, on three wire supports (8.7.3.1) above the non-flammable surface in the test area (8.7.2), as shown in Figure 3. Place the test specimen (8.7.4) crosswise over the cigarette, 15 mm from the end which has been ignited. Allow the cigarette to burn 10 mm beyond the point where the Initial fuse crosses it. Record whether the initial fuse is Ignlted.

prEN 14035-52002 (E)

Key
1

Test speclmen Cigarette Wiresupporl Non-flammable surface

2
3

4

a) Test assembly

All dimensions are in milllrnetre

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

b) Dlmenslons
Figure 3 Side ignition test

-

8.8 Labelling (type test and batch test)
Check conformity to 7.6.2 and 7.7.1 for example by comparing the type sizes on the actual label with a transparent copy made from Figure 4. Record whether the type sizes were correct.

2,8mm: A8C abc XYZ xyz 123

Figure 4: Slzes of print

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

Annex A (normative) Type testing

A1 General
For the purposes of type testing each of the batteries or combinations tested, except those used for the measurement of the inclination and the calibre and for the determination of net explosive content, shail meet one of the following sets of requirements.

a) If the battery or combination has an Initial fuse which is not designed to resist side Ignition, it shall conform to 4.1, 4.2,4.3.2 or 4.3.3, 4.4,4.5,4.7,4.8, 4.9 and clauses 5 and 7.

b) If the battery or combination has an initial fuse designed to resist side ignition, it shall conform to 4.1, 4,2,4.3.4, 4.4, 4.5, 4.7,4.8,4.9 and clauses 5 and 7.
The batteries or combinations used for the determination of net explosive content shall each conform to 4.6, 4.8, if applicable, and, If the initial fuse is designed lo resist side ignition, it shall conform to 4.3.4.
I
1.

The batteries or combinations subjected to mechanical conditioning In accordance with clause A.5 shall, additionally, conform to clause A.3. For batteries or combinations which are supplied In packs in order to protect the initial fuses of the batterles or combinations (see 4.3.3), each of the packs examined shall conform to clause 6 and 7.

A.2 Number of batteries or combinations to be tested
A total of 33 batteries or combinations shail be tested, in accordance with Table A.1. If the batteries or combinations are supplied In packs they shall be selected at random from at least 5 packs.

Table A.l: Number of batteries or combinations t o be tested Number of batterles or comblnatlons to be tested
10

Condition

Tests

'As received'

-Visual examination,
-8.1

-8.2, if applicable

-8.3
-8.8 10

Afler thermal conditioning in accordance -Visual examination, with clause A.4 -8.1

-8.3

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

10

After mechanical conditioning accordance wlth clause A.5

in -Visual examination,
-8.1

-8.3

3

'As received'

-8.4, if applicable
-8.5, if applicable
-8.6

-8.7

A.3 Loose pyrotechnic composition
The mass of any loose pyrotechnic composition collected after mechanical condltioning in accordance with clause A.5 shall not exceed 100 mg.

i
(.
A.4 Thermal condltloning
Slore the batteries or combinations for four weeks at a temperature of (50,O A 2,5) ' and then for at least two days C at room temperature before testlng. For batteries or combinations supplied in packs, condition the batteries or combinations by storing the approprlate number of complete, unopened packs.

A.5 Mechanical conditioning
A.5.1 Apparatus
k5.1.1

Mechanical shock apparatus, as illustrated In Flgures A.1 to A.3, comprising the following components.

a) a flat horizonlal platform made of steel, 800 rnrn x 600 mm, 2 mm to 3 mm thlck, with a 3 mm thick rim having a height of 15 mm; the platform is reinforced with eight steel ribs, 5 mm thick with a height of 30 mm, which are welded to the underside and run from the cenlre to each of the four corners and to the middle of each edge; ,
b) a 20 rnrn thick plate of fibreboard, firmly attached to the platform by screws;

i..

i

c) a cylindrical steel boss, diameter 125 mm and height 35 rnrn, located under the centre of the platform; d) a 284 rnrn long shaft, with diameter of 20 mm, fixed to the centre of the boss; e) a restralnlng peg, to prevent the platform from rotating; the mass of the platform assembly (items a) to e)) shall be 23 kg 1 kg;

*

f) an annular, elastorneric pressure spring, with a Shore hardness A, when determined In accordance with EN IS0 868, of 68, outside diameter 125 mm, inside diameter 27 mm and height 32 rnrn, on which the cylindrical boss will

rest; g) a shallow steel cylinder, inslde diameter 126 mm, wall thickness 5 mm, outside height 30 mm, with a base 8 rnrn thlck which has a 25 mm dlarneter hole drilled through the centre, to contain the elastomeric spring; h) a supporting steel cyllnder, outside diameter 80 mm,inside dlameter 60,1 rnrn and height 92,4 mm, to which the shallow cylinder Is screwed; i) a PVC liner, outside diameter 60 mm, inside diameter 20,2 rnrn and height 92,4 mm, located Inside the supporting cylinder and attached by a screw;

24

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

j) a steel mounting plate, lhlckness 12 mm, with a 25 mrn hole drilled through the centre, to whlch the supporting steel cyilnder Is screwed;

k) a steel base plate, thickness 12 mrn;
I)four supporting pillars, height 260 mm and diameter 32 mm, screwed to the mounting plate and to the base plate;

m) a framework to support the base plate so that Lhe complete assembly is at a convenient working height;
n) an aftachment to the shaft, allowing adjuslment to the overall length, fitted wlth a cam wheel, outside diameter 30,O mm, with a contact surface 8,O mm wide; o) a cyllndrical cam, outside diameter 120 mm, inside diameter I 0 0 rnm, wall thickness 10 mm, with a 'vertical drop' of 50,O mm between the high point and the low point;

p) a collar, outside diameter 50 mm, height 4,O mm;
q) an electric motor and suitable gearlng, to rotate the cam at a rotalionat frequency of 1 Hz.

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

Key
1 2 Restralnlng peg Platform Boss Pressure spring Cup Supporting cylinder
PVC liner

(

i

3

4

5
6

7
8 9

Mounting plate Shaft

10 Supporting pillar
Figure A,1

- Detail of top section of mechanical shock apparatus

prEN 14035-52002 (E)

Key

1
2
3

Mounting plate
Supporting pillar
Base plate

Figure A.2

-General assembly

of mechanical shock apparatus

prEN 14035-52002 (E)

Key

1
2

Cam Collar Cam wheel

3

Figure A.3

- Detall of shaft attachment and cam assembly of mechanical shock apparatus

!'

Cellularrubber sheet, 100 mrn thick. The materlal used shall have an apparent density, when determined A.5.1.2 in accordance with EN IS0 845, of 35 kglm3 and an indentation hardness check, when determined in accordance with I S 0 2439, of 215 N. A.5.1.3 Laboratory balance, capable of weighing to the nearest 0,l mg.

A.5.2 Procedure
A.5.2.1 Conditioning. Place a sheet of paper on the platform of the rnechanlcal shock apparatus (A.5.1 ,I) and place the batteries or combinations on top of the sheet of paper. For batteries or combinations which are supplied in packs In order to protect the Initial fuses of the batteries or comblnations, use the appropriate number of complete, unopened packs. Cover the batteries or comblnations or packs with the cellular rubber sheet (A.5.1.2) and secure it to the platform around its edges. Start the machlne so that the platform is raised and dropped onto the elastomeric spring, havlng adjusted the drop height (to aboul25 mm) so that the maxlmum deceleration of each shock is 490 mls2 and the duratlon of each shock Impulse is about 60 ms. Continue running the machine for 2 h. A.5.2.2 Collection of loose pyrotechnic composition. At the end of the 2 h period stop the machine and remove the batteries or combinations or packs. For batteries or combinations which have been conditioned in packs, carefully open the packs, remove the batteries or combinations and empty any loose material on to the sheet of paper. Separate any pyrotechnic composltion from the other loose materlal and weigh thls pyrotechnic composltion to the nearest 1 mg using the balance (A.5.1.3). Record whether the mass of the pyrotechnic composition exceeds

prEN 14035-5:2002

(E)

100 mg and for each individual element, record whether closure of the mouth, if any, was in place and retained the contents.

116 Number of primary packs or selectlon packs to be examined
For batteries or combinations whlch are supplied in packs in order to protect the initial fuses of the batteries or combinations, examine at least five packs to assess compliance with clause 6 and 7. The packs to be examined shall include all those whose contents are used for the tests described in clause 8,

A.7 Test report
The test report shall conform to EN ISOIIEC 17025 and shall include at least the followlng information, with items m) tow) and bb) to ss) being glven for each battery or combination tested: a reference to this standard, i.e. EN 14035-5; the complete identificationof the sample under test; the date of completion of the testlng; whether the means of ignition Is Identified by a protruding fuse; the means by which the initial fuse is protected; if the initial fuse is designed to resist side ignition, whether the protruding fuse ignited for each of the items tested for that purpose; if applicable, for each pack examlned, whether the pack completely enclosed the battery(ies1 or combination(s) and whether lhere were any holes or splits in the pack except those intended to enable the packaging to be opened and those which are otherwise technically necessary; the net explosive content of the battery or combination tested for that purpose, in grams and for each category 2 battery o combination tested for that purpose, whether the net r explosive content exceeds 200,O g and for all individual elements of each battery or combination tested for that purpose whether the total net explosive content and the net explosive content of each pyrotechnic unit, if any, and mass of report charge and whistling charge, if any, conform to the requirements of the indlvidual element; tested for that purpose and for a category 3 battery or combination whether the net explosive content of each battery or combination tested for that purpose exceeds 1000,O g or 300,O g if the battery or combination contalns a rocket or 500,O g if the battery or combination contains a shell-in-mortar and for all individual elements of the category battery or combination tested for that purpose whether the total net explosive content, the net explosive content of each pyrotechnic unlt, If any, and mass of report charge and whistling charge, If any, conform to the requirements of the individual element; if applicable, for each pack examined, whether the type name, category, safety information, name and address and telephone number of the manufacturep or distributoraor importeraand the reference to this standard were correctly stated on the pack;

prEN 14035-52002

(E)

j)
k)

If appllcable, for each pack examlned, whether the 'statement 'Must be sold as packaged' was correctly stated on the pack;

*

if applicable, for each pack examined, whether the specified information on the pack was clearly visible, easily legible, indelible, on a single-colour background and whether the type slzes were correct; whether the mass of any loose pyrotechnic composition collected after mechanical conditioning exceeded 100 mg and for each element, whether closures of the mouths, if any, were in place retained the contents of the battery or combination and of the individual elements, after mechanical conditioning; the materials of the body of the firework case, each individual element and pyrotechnic unit, the base and the means of fixing, if any, and whether the materials of the firework case, each Individual element and pyrotechnic unit, excluding staples and binding wires and rocket tubes containing the propellant charge, are paper, cardboard or plastics and whether the materials of the rocket tube containing the propellant charge, if any, was cardboard, plastics or sheathed aluminium

1 )

i and, if applicable.
I

I

I

[whether the end closures, the base andlor the means of fixing was made of non! metallic material;
!

I

n)

*

i

i if applicable, whether the orange fuse cover was in place over the initial fuse;
whether there were any holes, splits, dents or bulges in the body of the flrework case, each individual element and pyrotechnic unit, except those technlcally necessary for the correct functioning of the battery or combination; /if applicable, whether there were and holes and splits in any end closure;

j if appllcable, whether the closures were securely in place;

i if applicable, whether the base was securely In place;

iif applicable, whether there were any holes or spllts In the end closures and whether
1

i any end closure was loose or missing;

i
!

i if applicable, whether the type name, category, safety information, name and address
and telephone number of manufactureraor dlstributora or importeP and the reference j lo this standard were correctly stated on the battery or combination; jif appllcable, whether the specified information on the battery or combination was 1 clearly visible, easily legible, indelible, on a single-colour background and whether the !type slzes were correct;

i whether the protruding fuse was securely attached to the battery or combination; I
I

I

whether the battery or combinationfell over when tested for vertlcal stabllity; if applicable, whether the inclination of launching tube exceeded 15";

I

X)

Y )

if applicable, whether any launching tube for a rocket or any mortar of a shell-in-mortar was inclined;
if applicable, whether any calibre exceeded the requirements given for the individual

z)

prEN 14035-52002 (E)

elements: aa) the wlnd speed at the time of performance testing, in metres per second;

iwhether the inltlal fuse ignited within 10 s;
!
i
I

whether the ignition of the Initial fuse was visible; the duration of the Initial fuse burning In seconds and

!
!

'whether the duration of the initial fuse burning was not less than 3,O s or more than 8.0 s for a category 2 batlery or combination or not less than 5.0 s or more than 13.0 s f for a category 3 battery or comblnation;

!
I i
gg) hh) ii),

Iwhether the battery or combination produced its prlnclpal effects;
!whether the battery or combination exploded, other than from an intended effect;
!

:whether all Individual elements or pyrotechnic units of the battery or combination j functioned completely;
!
I

!if applicable, whether the rocket or shell from the shell-in-mortar exploded or burst i below a height of 20 m above the ground;

IIf applicable, whether any means of stabilization of fllght became detaches before the
j principal effects, other than ascent occurred;
I If applicable, whether the deviation or the angle of flight exceeds the requirements

Ji)
kk)

i
t

1given for the individual elements;

"

If applicable, whether any particle of debris which resulted from the functioning of a pyrotechnlc unit which was projected upwards from the battery or comblnation had a mass which exceeds the requirements given for the Individual elements; If applicable, whether any burning or incandescent malter fall below a height of 5 m from the ground, for a category 2 battery or combination, or below a height of 10 m from the ground, for a category 3 battery or combinatlon, before being extinguished; /whether the battery or combination remains upright or fixed whllst functioning; if applicable, the maximum A-weighted impulse sound pressure level, in decibels (Al) and whether the maximum A-weighted impulse sound pressure level exceeded 120 dB(Al);

II)

'

I

mm) nn)

"

I

00)

"

'whether any burning or incandescent matter fell to the ground a distance of more than 15,O m. for category 2 batteries or combinations, or 15,O rn, for category 3 batteries or Icombinations, from the testing point;
1

I !
rr)
ns)
+

qq)

+

pp)

!whether any flames caused by the functioning of the outdoor battery or combination iwere extinguished within 60,O s of the battery or combination ceasing to function; /whether any debris was projected laterally more than 8.0 rn,for category 2 batteries or .combinations, or 15,O m, for category 3 batteries or combinations, from the testing j point;

!

Iwhether the integrity of any firework case afler functioning did not conformed to the
1 requirements as for the individual elements;
Iif applicable, the burning time of the pyrotechnic composition and whether the burning

prEN 44035-5:2002 (E)

I

I
a

time was not more than 60,O for every l00,O g of pyrotechnic composition. a

Nole The eslerlsks In tho above list are mlerred lo In clause 0.5.

WMchever applies.

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

Annex 6 (normative) Batch testing

B.l General
For the purposes of batch testing, acceptance sampllng In accordance with clauses 8.2to B.6 shall be applied.

6.2 Sampling plans
Sampling shall be in accordance with IS0 2859-1 using double sampling plans and applying the switching procedures for normal, tightened and reduced inspection. Inspection level S-4 shall apply.

6.3 Unit of product
For batteries or comblnations which are not supplied in packs, the unit of product on which the sample size is based shall be the individual battery or combination. For batteries or combinations which are supplied In packs, the unit of product for the purpose of sampling to assess compliance with the requirements for the batteries or combinations shall be an individual battery or combination and the sample shall comprise the contents of the appropriate number of packs. The pack shall be the unit of product for the purpose of sampling to assess compliance with the requirements for the packs themselves and the appropriate number of packs shall be sampled separately and examined for faults.

B.4 Nonconformities
Nonconformities shall be classed in accordance with Table 6.1. Table B l . Ref. Property

- Summary of requirements and types of nonconforrnlty for batch testing
Requirement

Test
method

Type nonconformltya
-

of

4.1

ldentification of ignition

means

. of See 41
Shall be secure

Visual
8.1

Major Major Major Critlcal Major Major Major

42 .

Attachment of initial fuse

432 ..
4.4
4.5.1

Orange fuse cover over initial Shall be in place fuseb Materials of firework case Integrity of firework case Ignition of initial fuse See 4.4 See 4 5 1 .. See 51 . Shall be visible

Visual Visual Visual
8.3 8.3 8.3

51 .

51 .

Duration of Initial fuse burning:

prEN 14035.5:2002

(E)

Category 2 combination

battery

or

(3,O s to 8,O s) Extent of nonconformity:

< 2,O s or > 10,O s

Critical

r 2,O s and < 3,O s or >
8,O s and S 10,O s Category 3 combination battery or (5,O s to 13,O s) Extent of nonconformity:
< 3,O s or > 15,O s

Major

Critical

2 3,O s and c 5,O s or >

Major

13,Osand s 15,Os
5.2

Principal effect

As glven for the individual 8.3 elements or pyrotechnic units
All indivldual elements or 8.3 pyrotechnic units of the battery or combination shall function completely See 5.4 See 5.6 or combination ceased to function has
8.3 8.3 8.3

Minor

5.3

Functioning

Major

5.4
5.6 5.6

Explosion Burning or incandescent matter Extinguishing of any flames

Critical 8.3
8.3

Critical Minor

5 60,O s after the battery 8.3

5.7 5.8 5.9

Projected debris Mass of falloutb Height of Explosionb bursting or

See 5.7 See 5.8 See 5.9 See 5.10 See 5.1 I

Major Major Critical Major Crltical Major Crilical Major

5.10 5.11 5.12

Angle or deviation of flightb Means for stabilisation of flightb Stability

8.3 8.3

Shall remain upright or 8.3 fixed whilst functioning

5.13

Integrity of the firework case See 5.13 after functioning Burning rate of pyrotechnic Shall exceed 60,O s for compositionb 100,O g

8.3
8.3

5.14

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

6

Integrity of packG

...

7

Labelling of combinationb Labelling of packd

battery

Pack shall completely enclose the battery or comblnatlon and shall have no holes or splits, except there are Intended to open the packaging or otherwise technically necessary or Shall be correctly stated Visual and legible and on a single colour background Shall be correctly stated Visual and legible and on a single colour background See 7.6.2, 7.7.1 and 7.eb

Cr'tical

Minor

7

Minor

7

Sizes of print
See 3.32, 3.33 and 3.34 InprEN 14035-1:2002.

8.8

Mlnor

If applicable.

"

'

If a pack Is required to protect the lnltial fuses of lhe batteries or wmblnations.
If U~ere a pack. IS

8.5 Test report
'The test report shall include at least the items marked with an asterisk In clause A.7 (with items m) to v), bb) to mm) and 00) to ss) being given for each battery or comblnatlon tested),

B.6 Acceptance or rejection of a batch
8.6,1 Nonconforming unlts
Acceptance or rejection of the batch shalt be determined by the number of nonconforming unlts of each type, in accordance with B.6.2 to 6.6.5.
Acceptance or rejection of the batch 1 determined by the number of nonconfonning unlts of each type and not 6 NOTE: newssarily by the number of nonconformities found.

\

B.6.2 Crltical nonconforming units
For critical nonconforming units an acceptable quality level (AQL) of 0,65 % shall apply. If the batch falls to meet Ulis criterion, it shall be rejected. Any critical nonconforming units shall not also be counted as major nonconformingunits or minor nonconforrnlng units.

8.6.3 Malor nonconforrnlng unlts
For major nonconforming units an AQL of 2,5 % shall apply. If the batch fails to meet thls criterion, it shall be rejected. Any major nonconforming units shall not also be counted as minor nonconforming units.

8.6.4 Mlnor nonconforrnlng nits
For minor nonconforming units an AQL of 10 % shall apply. If the batch fails to meet this criterion, it shall be rejected,

,
prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

B.6.5 Batteries and combinations suppiled in units
For batteries or combinations which are supplied In packs, the acceptance criteria in B.6.2, B.6.3 and B.6.4 shall be applied separately to the actual batteries or combinations and to the packs (see clause B.3).

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

Ar~nex (normative) Method for determination of smouldering rate of C cigarette

Condition the cigarette for at least 16 h, immediately before the test, at a temperature of (23 k 2) "C and a relatlve humidity of (50 5) %. Mark the cigarette at 5 mm and 45 mm from the end to be lit. Ignite the cigarette and draw air through it until the tip glows brightly. Not less than 5 mm and not more than 8 mm of the cigarette shall be consumed in this operation. In draught-free air, impale the cigarette horizontally on a horizontal spike inserted not more than 13 mm from the unlit end. Record the time taken for the cigarette to smoulder from the 5 mm mark to the 45 m m mark.

prEN 14035-5:2002 (E)

Annex D (informative) A-Deviations

A-Deviatlon:

National deviations due to regulations, the alteration of which is for the time being outside the competence of the CEN members,

This European Standard does not fall under any Directive of the EC. In Ihe relevant CENICENELEC countries these A-deviations are valid instead of the provisions of the European Standard untit they have been removed.
Clause
Deviation

Page 1 of 1

Stevenson, Todd A.
From: Sent: To: Subject:

Ralph Ape( [ralph @ blackcatfireworks.com] Friday, September 08,2006 8:01 AM Stevenson, Todd A. Fireworks ANPR

Attachments: ANPR Final v2.pdf; European Standard.pdf

Attached is our letter of comments on the Fireworks ANPR along with a copy of the European Standard as a reference of very specific firework standards.

Ralph J. Apel, President Black Cat Marketing USA

Page 1 of

Stev

&
Sugedog@aoI.com Friday, September 08, 2006 11:48 AM Stevenson, Todd A.

(jC'/

(.

From:
Sent:

To:

Subject: [Possibly SPAM (k): ] - "FIREWORKS ANPR - Found word(s) drugs in the Text body

The CPSC has done a great job in the regulation of fireworks through labeling, size,powder content and fusing. I believe because of your input they have become a lot more safer than they were. However there are still injuries. I for one do not want to see a total ban on fireworks. I think more education through pamphlets and N stressing the danger of fireworks will show people they can injure if not used properly. I think by stressing the fact that alcohol and fireworks don't mix and anyone caught drinking and lighting fireworks will be heavily fined or even do jail time. Most of all fireworks are not toys and should never absolutely never be given to children. If they are again fine or jail time. We've educated about drinking and driving, about smoking and about taking drugs. Why can't we educate about fireworks? With your help i believe injuries due to fireworks will drop significantly. Thank you for listening to me and thank you for all the work you have done and will do. Bill Morrison blmrs2002@yahoo.com

-p%-.-,--

,---..---.-".--

---

P

-me,

Karen Metcalf [thefireworkslady@gmail.com] Saturday, September 09, 2006 2:22 PM Sent: To : Stevenson, Todd A. Subject: [Possibly SPAM (k): ] - Fireworks ANPR - Found word(s) risk free in the Text body
From:

The following is our opinion regarding the M R . We support continued testing of imported 1.4G fireworks, asd we agree that the ultimate purpose of such testing is public safety. We feel that it is important that multiple testing laboratories be available for use in this process. By eliminating a multiple lab scenario, opportunities arise for inequities in the testing process, including subjective reviews, and inconsistent and unauditable processes. Testing standards should be approved through open public processes, and not dictated by private organizations. It is a restraint of free trade to force everyone to use ITS as the only approved tester for the AFSL standards. If AFSL believes in its standards, and the testability of its standards, then any thrd party tester should be able to test to those standards. We will be suportive of making AFSL's standards mandatory, only if AFSL does the following: 1. Completes a full review of each of its standards and subjects the standards to outside technical review and human factors analysis; 2. Provides comprehensive standards that includes specific guidelines, acceptable materials, procedures, tolerances, and detailed testing procedures; 3. Allows any recognized third party testing agency to test products in accordance with the AFSL standards. With regard to the risk of injury, it also occurs to us that to truly coordinate efforts to address safety issues, the method of classifying injuries must be made more precise. Many injuries reported as fireworks injuries are not related to the actual use of the device, or are a result of misuse of a device, causing reports to be inaccurate. It is difficult to make an accurate risk of injury analysis without proper input. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this process.

Stevenson,
From: Sent: To: Subject:

4 . .
SJ [littleczr@yahoo.com] Sunday, September 10,2006 8:31 PM Stevenson, Todd A. Fireworks ANPR

On behalf of myself and others in the fireworks industry, who have only recently been made aware of CPSCs proposa1,I would like to request an extension to the deadline for comments.1 feel that an additional 30 days would give those of us in the industry enough time to develop beneficial suggestions for CPSC to consider. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. On behalf of the membership of the NFA, Robert Blake Vice President, National Fireworks Association

@protecbntr$ Quilb 3nternationa1, 3nr.
TOMHANDEL
First Vice-President

September 10,2006 Dear Sirs, I am writing on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Pyrotechnics Guild International, Inc. (PG1)to respectfully request an extension to the public comment period concerning the CPSC's Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on proposed amendments to Fireworks Safety Standards in CFR 16 Parts 1500 and 1507. This comment period is presently scheduled to expire Monday September 1I", 2006. The PGI is the largest hobbyist based pyrotechnics organization in the US and consists of some 3,800 members from all over the world. The current U.S. membership alone is more than 3,000. As you may well imagine, a coordination of a consensus opinion based on member input is not an easily or quickly obtained goal. We would be grateful for any deadline relief you can offer us in order that we may provide more comprehensive and useful input to the rulemaking process. In the interim, I am providing below that which we presently have assembled as our basic comments. The Commission is considering whether there may be a need to update and strengthen its regulation of fireworks devices. Comment: The climate which exists between the Fireworks Hobby/Industry and the CPSC notwithstanding, the aim and the stated goals of the PGI have always been to provide our members and members of the general public with whatever training, advice andlor rules are required to encourage and maintain the utmost in safety concerning the acquisition, storage, transportation, handling and use of pyrotechnic materials. In keeping with these goals, the PGI has developed and maintained what is arguably the best and most comprehensive Display Operator Certification Program available anywhere. This program is accepted in many states as

628 Harberts Court, Annapolis, MD 2140 1

Tel: 4 10-266-5276

E-mail: thandel@verizon.net

proof of competency and as an acceptable equivalent for obtaining state licensure as well. Members of the PGI are instrumental in the drafting and in maintaining National Fire Protection Association Code pertaining to fireworks found in NFPA 1123, NFPA 1124 and NFPA 1 126. These codes are fundamental to the fireworks industry, the hobbyist and regulatory and enforcement entities when it comes to ensuring safety in fireworks displays, stagelindoor displays, handling, storage use and disposal. PGI has always been committed to these goals and in that respect we are in agreement with the CPSC on safety issues pertaining to our hobbyists and the public alike. The standards currently in place for consumer fireworks testing and approval, specifically testing standards developed by the American Fireworks Standards Laboratory in Bethesda, MD, are acceptable to the PGI. These standards, based on original CPSC standards were even made more stringent than the CPSC had originally requested. Although we do feel the standards developed by the AFSL should be adopted, we do not feel that an award to a single laboratory is acceptable, fair to commerce or conducive to the integrity of the program itself. Rather, we would suggest that this testing procedure be administered by any and all such laboratory facilities or manufacturer's facilities equipped and deemed competent to administer tests and verify the results. The Commission is soliciting written comments concerning the risks of injury associated with fieworks that do not comply with the current fireworks device regulations, the regulatory options discussed in this notice, other possible ways to address these risks, and the economic impacts of the various regulatory alternatives. Comment: The PGI agrees that the introduction of devices which do not meet current standards into the marketplace should not be allowed. However, if there are such devices in the marketplace, it shows a lack of rigor or capacity in the testing and identification of these products during the quality and safety assurance stages of product introduction for which the CPSC has been responsible. This would be a powerful argument to allow and enlist other qualified laboratory and testing facilities to join with the AFSL to handle the estimated 250+ million tons of product used in the US each year.

The Testing Standards, per AFSL Specification, if adhered to, would diminish if not altogether eliminate this deficiency and render the basic question moot for all intents and purposes. Should any such devices appear on the marketplace, bypassing the testinglcertification process, they by definition would be illegally manufactured and prohibited items and not regular "consumer products." These instances would continue to be an enforcement issue within the purview of the CPSC. With a broader base of testing facilities involved, however, the number of such instances should decline, and the enforcement burden on the Commission should be correspondingly diminished. The Commission also invites interested persons to submit an existing standard, or a statement of intent to modify or develop a voluntary standard, to address the risk. Comment: We embrace self-imposed safety standards already in place in both our hobby and in the industry at large and will do everything we can to teach people to follow these standards. If further regulations-are to be considered, we would request that they be mutually derived in a collaborative process between the regulatory agency and the regulated industry.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide these preliminary comments. We would be grateful for your favorable consideration of an extension to the comment period in order that we may provide further, more comprehensive and useful input.
Respectfully, Is1 Thomas H. Handel

PGI Board of Directors
Bill Bahr, President Tom Handel, Vice President John Steinberg, 2"d Vice President Kurt Medlin, Publications Vice President Keith Midura, Secretary-Treasurer

BEFORE THE U.S. CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

AMENDMENT TO FIREWORKS SAFETY STANDARDS ADVANCE NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND INFORMATION

COMMENTS OF THE AMERICAN PYROTECHNICS ASSOCIATION

September 11, 2006

Julie L. Heckman Executive Director American Pyrotechnics Association 79 10 Woodmont Avenue Suite 1220 Bethesda, Maryland 208 14

INTRODUCTION By Federal Register Notice dated July 12,2006, the CPSC announced an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on whether to update and strengthen its firework regulations. 71 Fed Reg. 39249 (2006). The Notice requested comments on the risks of injury associated with fireworks that do not comply with the current fireworks device regulations, comments on several options outlined m h e r in the Notice and comments on other ways to address these risks, including tendering of existing standards such as the AFSL Standards. Comments are due on or before September 11,2006.

a.

COMMENTOR The American Pyrotechnics Association is the trade association of the fireworks industry. Its members include companies in the consumer, display and proximate pyrotechnics sectors of the industry. In the consumer fireworks sector, its members include U.S. importers and distributors of consumer fireworks, foreign manufacturers and exporters of consumer fireworks, various suppliers to the industry including carriers, brokers, transportation intermediaries, insurers, banking institutions, advertising specialty companies, etc. The APA has regularly appeared before the CPSC in every rulemaking involving consumer fireworks since the original rulemaking in 1976, which culminated in the promulgation of Part 1507. The APA appreciates this opportunity to submit comments in this proceeding. POSITION OF COMMENTOR At the out set, the APA wishes to challenge the CPSC with regard to its statement that, "during the past few years, there has been an increase in the estimated number of fireworks-related injuries". The fireworks industry has experienced unprecedented growth, specifically during the past 5 years following the horrific events of September 11,2001. Consumer fireworks useage has doubled during the past five ( 5 ) years alone and when one factors in the estimated number of injuries vs. consumption, the fireworksrelated injury rate has never been lower in the 29 year history of CPSC regulation. Nonetheless, the APA is a strong supporter of continuing to do all that it can do to further reduce the rate of injuries associated with consumer fireworks, like commenting on this ANPR, and especially in promoting safety tips to consumers and reaching out to local officials, media and the public with regard to the importance of adhering to instructions for use. The CPSC proposes four altematives to reduce the identified risks associated with fireworks devices. 7 1 Fed. Reg. at 39250. The APA supports all four of the altematives. First, the CPSC proposes issuing a rule requiring mandatory testing of fireworks devices to the FHSA regulations currently in place (16 CFR Part 1507 and Part 1500.17 et seq). The APA supports this proposal. It would note that the APA already supports testing of

fireworks before they are shipped to the U.S. andor when they arrive in the U.S. APA 87- 1, Introduction at 1, and Testing Program at Appendix B. APA would also note such certification is also required by revised NFPA 1124, Section 6.2.7.1. APA would highlight that its members use many different testing companies and that it would be a restrictive practice to limit the testing to one testing company. Second, the CPSC proposes issuing a rule requiring additional firework device requirements. The APA would note that both the APA 87-1 and the AFSL Standards are more detailed and cover more fireworks devices than Parts 1507 and 1500. Third, the CPSC raises the issue of relying upon a tendered standard pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1262(f)(6). The APA supports the CPSC relying upon APA 87-1 andor the AFSL Standards and fully enforcing those standards. APA would note that APA 87- 1 is already federal regulation by dint of incorporation in the PHMSA regulations at 49 CFR Part 173.57@(1). Fourth, the CPSC raises the issue of taking enforcement action under Section 15 of the FHSA. The APA supports enforcement of the current FHSA standards and any relied upon standards under Section 15 of the FHSA.
CONCLUSION

Recognizing that we are at the beginning of a rulemaking, and these concepts will be fleshed out in the rulemaking process, APA reserves the right to submit additional comments later on. However, at this juncture, the APA fully supports the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. Respectfully submitted, American Pyrotechnics Association

Julie L. Heckman Executive Director

rage I or

I

Stevenson, Todd A.
* -

From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject:

Julie Heckman [jheckman@americanpyro.com] Friday, September 08,2006 11:31 PM Stevenson, Todd A. Dhbakerlaw@aol.com Fireworks - ANPR

Attachments: APAANPRComments.doc

Attached please find the comments of the American Pyrotechnics Association (APA) regarding the FireworksANPR published on July 12, 2006 in the Federal Register.

If you have any questions, please contact me via cell phone during the next 9 days as I will be travelling for APA's annual convention at 240-401 -4513. Otherwise I can be reached at the APA office, 301-907-8181. Yours truly, Julie L. Heckman Executive Director American Pyrotechnics Association 301-907-8181 jheckman@americanpyro.com

Page 1 of 1

Stevenson, Todd A.
From:
Sent:

Joe Martin [fireworkss@bellsouth.net] Monday, September 11,2006 5:17 PM Stevenson, Todd A.

To :

Subject: FIREWORKS ANRP

To Whom it may concern: I would respectfully like to make the following comments on the proposed Anrp in reference to fireworks. I would like to see the Cpsc take random samples of fireworks that would reflect a more realistic representation of items that conform to CPSC standards instead o f " catering to AFSL" testing procedures. Why not test those products like all others. The CPSC should consider the number of pieces light vs. pounds of fireworks imported to reflect a more realistic percentage of incidents. If you take this into account I am sure you will see the percentage of accidents would be drastically reduced. Your records indicate that as an industry we have gone from 70% failure to 70% compliance in just 10 years, I think that is remarkablejob of an industry policing itself and showing that we are very safety orientated. I would also request an extension of time so that these suggestions can be studied. Your numbers have shown accidents have declined while usage has dramatically increase therefore the measures that are in place now are more than adequate according to your figures In conclusion I would like to see better reporting for hospitals that truly reflect Fireworks accidents not Firework related accidents. Respectfully, Joe Martin

Stevenson, Todd A.
From: Sent: To : Subject:

-5d
Jared Hicks [jaredhi@hotrnail.corn] Monday, September 11,2006 4:43 PM Stevenson, Todd A. FIREWORKS ANPR

To whom it may concern,
I am writing to express my displeasure with the possibility of this Fireworks ANPR being enacted. According to statistics provided by the CPSC, the use of fireworks has risen from 120.3 million pounds in 1996 to 283.2 million pounds in 2006. Fireworks (by poundage) have more than doubled in the United States in that period of time. Fireworks injuries, however, have gone down by almost half in that time as well. In 1996 there were 6.1 fireworks related injuries per 100,000 pounds of fireworks. In 2006 there were 3.8 fireworks related injuries per 100,000 pounds of fireworks. That is a very sharp decrease of injuries in those ten years, especially compared to the over doubling of fireworks quantities in the United States in that time.

Changes like this would benefit certain organizations that might not have the best interests of the fireworks industry. These organizations are run by only a handful of board members who represent a very small amount of the fireworks companies in the United States. I question whether they are worried about strengthening their organization more than helping out the fireworks industry as a whole. Therefore, I strongly urge the CPSC to not allow this fireworks ANPR to pass. Thank you for your time, Jared Hicks

Stevenson, Todd A.
From: Sent: To: Subject:

33
Mark Bolinger [markcbolinger@hotmail.com] Monday, September 11,2006 4:36 PM Stevenson, Todd A. FIREWORKS ANPR

To whom it may concern, I am writing to express my displeasure with the possibility of this Fireworks ANPR being enacted. According to statistics provided by the CPSC, the use of fireworks has risen from 120.3 million pounds in 1996 to 283.2 million pounds in 2006. Fireworks (by poundage) have more than doubled in the United States in that period of time. Fireworks injuries, however, have gone down by almost half in that time as well. In 1996 there were 6.1 fireworks related injuries per 100,000 pounds of fireworks. In 2006 there were 3.8 fireworks related injuries per 100,000 pounds of fireworks. That is a very sharp decrease of injuries in those ten years, especially compared to the over doubling of fireworks quantities in the United States in that time. Changes like this would benefit certain organizations that might not have the best interests of the fireworks industry. These organizations are run by only a handful of board members who represent a very small amount of the fireworks companies in the United States. I question whether they are worried about strengthening their organization more than helping out the fireworks industry as a whole. Therefore, I strongly urge the CPSC to not allow this fireworks ANPR to pass. Thank you for your time, Mark C. Bolinger

5

.

i

Stevenson, Todd A.
From: Sent: To: Subject:

Brian Hamilton [brian@jakesfireworks.net] Monday, September 11,2006 4:27 PM Stevenson, Todd A. Fireworks ANPR

To whom it may concern, I am writing to express my displeasure with the possibility of this Fireworks ANPR being enacted. According to statistics provided by the CPSC, the use of fireworks has risen from 120.3 million pounds in 1996 to 283.2 million pounds in 2006. Fireworks (by poundage) have more than doubled in the United States in that period of time. Fireworks injuries, however, have gone down by almost half in that time as well. In 1996 there were 6.1 fireworks related injuries per 100,000 pounds of fireworks. In 2006 there were 3.8 fireworks related injuries per 100,000 pounds of fireworks. That is a very sharp decrease of injuries in those ten years, especially compared to the over doubling of fireworks quantities in the United States in that time. Changes like this would benefit certain organizations that might not have the best interests of the fireworks industry. These organizations are run by only a handful of board members who represent a very small amount of the fireworks companies in the United States. I question whether they are worried about strengthening their organization more than helping out the fireworks industry as a whole. Therefore, I strongly urge the CPSC to not allow this fireworks ANPR to pass. Thank you for your time,

Brian Hamilton

Page 1 oi 1

35

Stevenson, Todd A.
From: Sent:

SkyKingMel@aol.com Monday, September 11,2006 4:13 PM Stevenson, Todd A.

To :

Subject: CPSC ANPR

I would respectfully like to make the following comments on the proposed Anrp in reference to fireworks. I would like to see the Cpsc take random samples of fireworks that would reflect a more realistic representation of items that conform to CPSC standards instead of "catering to AFSL" testing procedures. Why not test those products like all others. The CPSC should consider the number of pieces light vs. pounds of fireworks imported to reflect a more realistic percentage of incidents. If you take this into account I am sure you will see the percentage of accidents would be drastically reduced. Your records indicate that as an industry we have gone from 70% failure to 70% compliance in just 10 years, I think that is remarkable job of an industry policing itself and showing that we are very safety orientated. I would also request an extension of time so that these suggestions can be studied. Your numbers have shown accidents have declined while usage has dramatically increase therefore the measures that are in place now are more than adequate according to your figures In conclusion I would like to see better reporting for hospitals that truly reflect Fireworks accidents not Firework related accidents.
THANK YOU, MELISSA CRAWFORD

rage

I

or

I

Stevenson, Todd A.
From:
Sent:

Stifler808247@aol.com Monday, September 11,2006 6:26 PM Stevenson, Todd A.

To :

Subject: Fireworks ANRP

To whom it may concern, I am writing this letter in an attempt to petition the CPSC to not adopt the safety testing standards of the AFSL . It has been brought to my attention that their testing may not be reflective of the appropriate way to test the proper use of fireworks, thus causing false results. Over the past number of years the CPSC has done an adequate job of testing. The number of accident has reduced drastically each year since the CPSC'S inseption, and are reflective of its testing practices working . I would like to see maybe an exctention on this issue so that it could possible be discussed more between the industry and the CPSC before a final descission is made . This matter is very important to those of us that enjoy fireworks, but not only enjoy them but enjoy practicing using them safely . thank you for your time in this matter best regards, Aaron Pfeifer

Stevenson, Todd A.
"
m-----.

--b.-------.-,--p-..---"

--me,w

From: cyozwiak@netzero.net
Sent: Monday, September 11,2006 8:08 PM

To:

Stevenson, Todd A.

To Whom It May Concern:
I would respectfully like to make the following comments on the proposed Anrp in reference to fireworks. I would like to see the Cpsc take random samples of fireworks that would reflect a more realistic representation of items that conform to CPSC standards instead o f " catering to AFSL" testing procedures. Why not test those products like all others. The CPSC should consider the number of pieces light vs. pounds of fireworks imported to reflect a more realistic percentage of incidents. If you take this into account I am sure you will see the percentage of accidents would be drastically reduced. Your records indicate that as an industry we have gone from 70% failure to 70% compliance in just 10 years, I think that is remarkable job of an industry policing itself and showing that we are very safety orientated. I would also request an extension of time so that these suggestions can be studied. Your numbers have shown accidents have declined while usage has dramatically increase therefore the measures that are in place now are more than adequate according to your figures In conclusion I would like to see better reporting for hospitals that truly reflect Fireworks accidents not Firework related accidents. Respectfully, Chris Yozwiak

Stevenson, Todd A.
From: Sent: To : Subject: Rachelle Spellman [rachelle-spellman@hotmail.com] Monday, September 11,2006 11:I PM 3 Stevenson, Todd A. FIREWORKS ANPR

5
..-#

,d / <

'-.,

I would like to see the Cpsc take random samples of fireworks that would reflect a more realistic representation of items that conform to CPSC standards instead of catering to AFSLw testing procedures. Why not test those products like we test all others. The CPSC should consider the number of pieces light vs. pounds of fireworks imported to reflect a more realistic percentage of incidents. If you take this into account I am sure you will see the percentage of accidents would be drastically reduced. In Looking over your records I found that you indicate that as an industry we have gone from 70% failure to 70% compliance in just 10 years, I think that is a remarkable job of an industry policing itself and showing that we are very safety orientated.
I would also request a time extension so that these suggestions can be studied. Your numbers have shown accidents have declined while usage has dramatically increase therefore the measures that are in place now are more than adequate according to your figures. In conclusion I would like to see better reporting for hospitals that truly reflect Fireworks accidents not Firework related accidents. By better reporting from hospitals it would make the statistics a lot more accurate.

Respectfully, Rachelle Spellman

September 11,2006 Office of the Secretary Consumer Product Safety Commission Room 502 3330 East-West Highway Bethesda, Maryland 208 14

RE: Fireworks ANPR
To Whom It May Concern:

I support the CPSC's intent of reducing fireworks risk and improving fireworks safety. I am concerned that the justification for changing current standards or testing methods is not fully warranted by the estimated increase in fueworks injuries.
The ANPR that was published in the July 12,2006 Federal Register indicates there has been an increase in estimated injuries from 2002 to 2005. Additionally, the ANPR indicates that there were four deaths associated w-ith fireworks in 2005. I am concerned that these published statistics do not accurately reflect the status of fireworks injuries, especially when compared to the increase in fireworks consumption. That is, do the statistics separate injuries due to professional fireworks versus injuries due to consumer fireworks? Also, do the statistics separate injuries by type of device? I believe that statistics that have more 'granularity' will be more useful in helping the CPSC determine the true nature of the ~ i s of the risk to k consumers. If a consumer obtains a professional fireworks device (or an illegal explosive device) and injures or kills his or her self, or others, that data point should not be included in Consumer Fireworks statistics. A professional or illegal explosive device is just that, and separate statistics should be maintained. I am also concerned that the statistics that the CPSC utilizes do not have the necessary granularity to determine if the consumer was properly utilizing fireworks devices or if they were intentionally or unintentionally misusing the device. I suggest that consumer fireworks injuries can be sufficiently mitigated by expending resources on safety education, not by revisiting the current status of device testing. I believe it is also important to look at the number of injuries per unit weight of fireworks used, not just the raw number of injuries. It is to be expected that an increase in the unit weight of fireworks used will lead to an increase in the raw number of injuries. Lastly, I believe it would be in the Commission's and the public's best interest, to extend the time available for comment on this issue. This will allow for additional research and interpretation of data, and will allow for an explanation of the current data being used to justify this proposed change. Sincerely,

Andrew Webb 499 River Rd Otsego, Michigan 49078

Page 1 of 1

Stevenson, Todd A.
From: Sent: To :

Jim Ramsey [jimvtx@gmail.com] Monday, September 11,2006 5 2 0 PM Stevenson, Todd A.

Subject: FIREWORKS ANPR

To whom it may concern,

I am writing to express my displeasure with the possibility of this
Fireworks ANPR being enacted. According to statistics provided by the CPSC, the use of fireworks has risen from 120.3 million pounds in 1996 to 283.2 million pounds in 2006. Fireworks (by poundage) have more than doubled in the United States in that period of time. Fireworks injuries, however, have gone down by almost half in that time as well. In 1996 there were 6.1 fireworks related injuries per 100,000 pounds of fireworks. In 2006 there were 3.8 fireworks related injuries per 100,000 pounds of fireworks. That is a very sharp decrease of injuries in those ten years, especially compared to the over doubling of fireworks quantities in the United States in that time. Changes like this would benefit certain organizations that might not have the best interests of the fireworks industry. These organizations are run by only a handful of board members who represent a very small amount of the fireworks companies in the United States. I question whether they are worried about strengthening their organization more than helping out the fireworks industry as a whole. Therefore, I strongly urge the CPSC to not allow this fireworks ANPR to pass. Thank you for your time,

Jim Ramsey

9/12/2006

merican Fireworks Standards Laboratory
7316 Wisconsin Avenue, Sulte 214 Bethesda, Maryland USA 20814 Telephone: 3011907-9115 Facsimile: 3011907-9117 Emall: afslhq&fsl.org

September 11,2006

Mr. Todd Stevenson Office of the Secretary U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission 4330 East West Highway Bethesda, MD 208 14-4408 Re: Comments on Fireworks ANPR

Dear Mr. Stevenson: The American Fireworks Standards Laboratory ("AFSL") is pleased to submit comments to the Consumer Product Safety Commission ("CPSC") on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ("ANPR") issued by the Commission on July 11,2006 (7 1 Fed. Reg. 39249) announcing the CPSC's intent to review and possibly revise its existing fireworks regulations located at 16 C.F.R. $$ 1500 and 1507. AFSL is a nonprofit corporation organized by members of the fireworks industry to establish voluntary safety standards for the design and performance of consumer fireworks and to certify fireworks that meet those standards. Since 1990, AFSL's voluntary standards development and certification activities have effectively supplemented and strengthened the CPSC's efforts to protect consumer safety.' Close collaboration between AFSL and the CPSC has benefited both entities, along with consumers, by facilitating the efficient targeting of resources to address high priority fireworks safety issues. As a result, most consumer fireworks sold in the U.S. today meet or exceed the stringent regulations and safety standards of both the CPSC and AFSL. Nevertheless, the substantial progress made by the CPSC and AFSL to improve fireworks safety is incomplete. In particular, among fireworks companies that do not participate in AFSL's voluntary testing and certification program, the rate of noncompliance with the CPSC's mandatory safety regulations remains at an unacceptable level. As discussed in more detail

Descriptions of AFSL, its voluntary standards, and its testing and certification program are provided in the enclosed Appendices.

Mr. Todd Stevenson September 11,2006 Page 2
below, we believe that this situation can be addressed effectively by the CPSC through an integrated, three-part strategy that combines:

0 mandatory testing by fireworks companies to certiij that their consumer products comply with the CPSC's existing fireworks regulations; 0 formal reliance by the CPSC on the AFSL's voluntary standards; and
0 application of the reporting requirements contained in Section 15 of the Consumer Product Safety Act ("CPSA"), 15 U.S.C. 2064, to failures to comply with the AFSL standards expressly relied upon by the CPSC. As discussed in more detail below, we believe the combination of these steps, when implemented simultaneously, offers the best opportunity to maximize consumer safety.

CPSC and AFSL Progress Has Been Substantial But Incomplete
Working alongside one another, the CPSC and AFSL have made remarkable strides in improving the quality and safety of consumer fireworks. According to figures provided by the CPSC, at the time the CPSC implemented its own testing of imported fireworks in the late 1980s, approximately 76 percent of all tested shipments failed to meet the CPSC's fireworks regulations. As recently as 1994 - AFSL's first year of testing fireworks in China - CPSC data indicate that the rate of noncompliance with the CPSC regulations was still very high at 73 percent of tested shipments. Ten years later, however, the overall noncompliance rate had shrunk dramatically to 28 percent of tested shipments, with much of the improvement attributable to AFSL's efforts to develop and promote its more detailed and stringent voluntary standards and certification program.2 Ln 2005, only 17 percent of AFSL-certified shipments inspected by the CPSC were identified by the CPSC as not being infull compliance with the CPSC regulations. In contrast, nearly half of the inspected shipments that lacked AFSL certification failed to comply with the CPSC regulations. The impact of AFSL's standards and testing is even greater when comparing actionable violations of the CPSC's regulations - last year, the CPSC found only five percent of AFSL-certified shipments it inspected had an actionable violation of CPSC regulations, while 36 percent of the inspected shipments not certified by AFSL had actionable violation^.^ AFSL's own test data reflect similarly dramatic improvements in the compliance level for the overwhelming majority of fireworks manufactured in China. In 1994, only 64 percent of all
-

As part of its efforts to promote greater understanding and acceptance of its program within the fireworks industry, AFSL has been very active in reaching out to the Chinese fireworks manufacturers that produce the vast majority of the fireworks sold in the United States. Among other things, AFSL has translated its voluntary standards into Chinese and routinely provides continuing education programs to Chinese manufacturers about compliance with AFSL's standards. This information was previously provided to AFSL by the CPSC's fireworks compliance staff.

2

Mr. Todd Stevenson September 11,2006 Page 3

Chinese fireworks tested by AFSL complied with both the CPSC's regulations and the AFSL's more stringent voluntary standards. By 2005, the rate of compliance with both sets of standards had risen to 90 percent of shipments by AFSL program participants. Graphs illustrating the growth of AFSL's certification program and the positive impact it has had on compliance rates are provided at Appendix 1.4 Similarly, the CPSC's data on injuries due to fireworks demonstrate a corresponding trend. Since 1994, the rate of fireworks-related injuries has declined by about a quarter from approximately 4.8 to 3.6 injuries per 100,000 people in 2005. At the same time, according to statistics tracked by the American Pyrotechnics Association ("APA"), annual consumption of fireworks has nearly tripled from 1994 level^.^ Thus, after factoring in consumers' increased exposure to fireworks in recent years (due to increased fireworks consumption), the actual risk of injury resulting from a given level of exposure to fireworks has decreased by a dramatic 75 percent over the past 11 years. Again, we believe that AFSL's voluntary standards and certification program have been instrumental in achieving that reduction in the injury rate.6 Nevertheless, despite the tremendous progress made to date, there still exists a persistent level of industry non-compliance with the CPSC regulations. As noted in the ANPR, after years of steady improvement, the overall rate of compliance with the CPSC regulations observed by the CPSC in its inspections of fireworks shipments leveled off between 2002 and 2004 at around 72 percent, and fell to 59 percent in 2005. As discussed above, these statistics almost certainly understate the actual compliance rate of the industry across all fireworks types, due to the manner in which the CPSC targets fireworks shipment lots for inspection (often targeting fireworks types with a greater chance of non-compliance). Significantly, the compliance rate observed by the CPSC for products tested by AFSL has been consistently higher, averaging 8 1 percent from 2003 to 2005. This fact highlights the effectiveness of AFSL's certification program and strongly suggests that measures to improve the CPSC compliance rate will be most effective if geared toward promoting independent testing and certification of compliance with either the CPSC regulations or the AFSL standards.

The differences in the compliance rates measured by the CPSC and AFSL are attributable to differences in the datasets used to calculate the rates. Notably, the CPSC data is limited to the relatively small sample of fireworks shipments it tests (typically fewer than 400 lots per year). Moreover, many of the shipment lots selected for CPSC testing are chosen based on the prior compliance records of similar products (as a means of conserving CPSC resources while targeting higher risk products). On the other hand, AFSL's compliance data includes all types of fireworks and all of the shipment lots (nearly 30,000 per year) tested by AFSL. Thus, because the CPSC data does not reflect a representative sample of fireworks tested by AFSL, caution should be exercised in interpreting the compliance rates derived from the CPSC data. The APA also estimates that the annual consumption-based rate of fireworks-related injuries has declined 90 percent since 1976 from 38 to 3.8 injuries per 100,000 pounds of fireworks. See Appendix 1 for more details. As noted in the CPSC's 2005 Fireworks Annual Report, the standard errors associated with the CPSC's estimated injury rates make it difficult to compare the estimated injury rates across a period of years in order to identify trends in the data. However, when the substantial increase in fireworks consumption over the past several years is factored into the analysis, the downward trend in the risk of injury becomes statistically significant.
5

Mr. Todd Stevenson September 11,2006 Page 4

CPSC Action is Needed to Improve Fireworks Safety
Although the history of fireworks safety over the past 30 years is for the most part a tremendous success story, additional steps are needed to extend and solidify many of the safety standards and practices embraced now by a majority of industry participants. As discussed below, we believe the CPSC should pursue a comprehensive strategy that combines (a) mandatory certification by fireworks companies to the CPSC's existing fireworks regulations, (b) CPSC reliance upon AFSL's voluntary standards, and (c) mandatory reporting to the CPSC of noncompliance with specific AFSL standards expressly relied upon by the CPSC. Each element of this integrated approach will help to achieve the goal of promoting greater fireworks safety, as follows: The proposed mandatory certification to the CPSC's regulations will promote greater compliance with the regulations, particularly among fireworks companies that do not currently participate in AFSL's certification program; CPSC reliance upon AFSL's voluntary standards will, in effect, elevate the minimum compliance threshold for some companies when combined with the reporting requirements in CPSA 6 15(b); and

O The application of the CPSA 5 15(b) reporting requirements to fireworks that fail to
meet one or more of the relied upon AFSL standards will provide the CPSC with an effective tool to evaluate and hold accountable companies that fail to meet their fireworks safety obligations. We believe this approach holds the best chance of further and materially lowering the noncompliance rate while simultaneously raising the safety standards applied to many fireworks companies. However, the ultimate success of this strategy depends heavily upon the implementation of all three elements simultaneously. Each of the three elements is described below.

Mandatory Certification is Needed to Address Limited, But Persistent, Noncompliance. The effectiveness of the CPSC's existing fireworks regulations is hampered by the absence of an efficient enforcement mechanism such as mandatory testing and certification. We believe the CPSC and the public would benefit significantly from the adoption of a new rule, under Section 10(a) of the Federal Hazardous Substances Act ("FHSA"), requiring all fireworks sold in the U.S. to be independently tested and certified for their compliance with the CPSC's existing fireworks regulations. Independent testing and certification of all consumer fireworks offers both greater certainty of compliance for companies and improved targeting of inspections and enforcement actions for the CPSC and U.S. Customs.
Please understand that we are not proposing a new CPSC certification program to replace AFSL's own certification program. Instead, we see both certification programs operating in concert - with the more stringent AFSL certification program enhancing and complementing the

Mr. Todd Stevenson September 11,2006 Page 5
CPSC's certification program. At the same time, due to AFSL's complete incorporation of the CPSC's regulations into its own voluntary standards, we would expect AFSL certification to be accepted by the CPSC in lieu of the proposed mandatory CPSC certification. If this mandatory certification program is adopted by the CPSC with the proper internal controls and safeguards, we would expect markedly higher compliance rates fiom companies that are not currently participants in AFSL's program. In order to minimize the risk of fiaud or inadequate service quality, we urge the Commission to set rigorous qualifications and procedures for any entities chosen to perform the necessary testing and certification services. We offer AFSL's own certification program as a model that the Commission may find helpful. Brief summaries of AFSLystesting and certification program are provided at Appendices 2 and 3.

Formal Reliance on AFSL's Voluntary Standards Would Enhance the CPSC's Existing Fireworks Regulations. The CPSC's existing fireworks regulations have remained relatively unchanged since their adoption more than 30 years ago. Over the intervening years, as fireworks technologies, products and markets have evolved, the CPSCysregulations have not kept pace with the safety issues presented by products on the market. To address this gap, AFSL has developed its own voluntary safety standards that incorporate and supplement the CPSC's regulations. As a result, AFSL's voluntary standards provide more stringent and detailed requirements and a higher level of consumer safety than currently found under the CPSC

regulation^.^
Furthermore, AFSL's Standards Committee recently completed an exhaustive review of AFSL's voluntary standards in order to update them and to identify and eliminate standards that were no longer deemed neces~ary.~ copy of the newly revised AFSL standards is provided for .A your review at Appendix 4. We strongly urge the Commission to rely formally upon AFSL's voluntary standards under the virtually identical provisions of FHSA $ 3(g)(2), 15 U.S.C. $ 1262(g)(2), and CPSA $ 9@)(2), 15 U.S.C. 8 2058@)(2). By doing so, the Commission would effectively bolster its existing regulations, improve compliance and increase consumer safety. Under FHSA 8 3(g)(2) and CPSA $8 7@)(l) and 9(b)(2), the CPSC is required to defer to a voluntary standard rather than issue a mandatory, ruled-based standard when:

One example of this is the inclusion in AFSL's voluntary standards of detailed provisions pertaining to the design and performance of multiple-tube aerial fireworks devices. The CPSC has effectively relied upon these AFSL standards in the absence of similarly detailed provisions in its own regulations. Other illustrative examples are provided in Appendix 5. AFSL's Standards Committee is designed to facilitate participation in the standard-setting process by a broad cross-section of affected stakeholders while also drawing upon the deep knowledge of some of the leading technical experts in the field. The Standards Committee includes industry, government and consumer representatives, as well as representatives fkom the insurance industry and the fire services sector. Significantly, two representatives fkom the CPSC and one fkom the U.S. Department of Transportation also serve on AFSL's Standards Committee.
8

7

Mr. Todd Stevenson September 11,2006 Page 6

O the voluntary standard is likely to result in the elimination or adequate reduction of
the risk of injury the CPSC seeks to address; and

O it is likely that there will be substantial compliance with the voluntary standard.
AFSL believes that the integrated approach proposed in this letter meets both of these tests required for CPSC reliance on a voluntary standard. Because AFSL's voluntary standards incorporate, and in many areas exceed, all of the requirements found in the existing CPSC fireworks regulations, CPSC reliance upon AFSL's voluntary standards can only enhance consumer safety protection. As described above, AFSL's successful track record in lowering the risk of injury and in promoting significantly higher compliance rates for products tested to the AFSL standards also provides strong and compelling evidence of the likely beneficial effect on consumer safety of CPSC reliance on the voluntary standards. Furthermore, AFSL estimates that about 80 percent of the total annual volume of consumer fireworks imports are currently tested to AFSL's voluntary standards. When combined with the mandatory CPSA 5 15(b) reporting requirements discussed below, CPSC reliance on AFSL's standards appears likely to cause more of the remaining twenty percent of imported fireworks to be tested to AFSL's standards. Also, because consumer fireworks have historically been regulated by the CPSC under the Federal Hazardous Substances Act, we believe the Commission may need to reach a finding under CPSA 5 30(d) that it is in the public interest to regulate the risk of injury posed by consumer fireworks in order to rely upon AFSL's voluntary standards under the CPSA. Given (a) the crucial role to be played by mandatory reporting in promoting industry adherence to the voluntary standards to be relied upon under this proposal, and (b) the absence of an adequate reporting requirement in the FHSA comparable to CPSA 5 15(b), we believe the Commission can easily meet the public interest standard required by CPSA 5 30(d).

Application of the CPSA Section 15 Reporting Requirements to AFSL's Standards Will Improve Compliance Accountability. Once the CPSC relies upon AFSL's voluntary standards under CPSA 5 9(b)(2), we believe the Commission should apply the reporting requirements of CPSA 5 15(b) (15 U.S.C. 5 2064(b)) to those standards, as provided in 16 C.F.R. 5 1115.5(b). CPSC reliance on AFSL's voluntary standards would, among other things, provide clearer parameters and incentives for fireworks companies that are not currently AFSL participants to certify their products to AFSL's voluntary standards. This will be particularly true if the companies are required to report the specific provisions of the AFSL standards that are not met, rather than just a general statement of noncompliance.

CPSC support of an industry-based, independent third party certification program as a means of obtaining compliance with its regulations has been and will continue to be essential to the success of the industry's efforts in this regard. Moreover, AFSL's ability to maintain standards addressing safety issues in the ever-changing fireworks industry; to objectively test

Mr. Todd Stevenson September 11,2006 Page 7 using independent, qualified personnel at the point of manufacture; and to act as a liaison between the CPSC and the industry, all serve to assist the CPSC effectively in its consumer safety role. If the industry is to continue to succeed in addressing the safety of consumer fireworks, the CPSC must continue to demand full compliance with the fireworks regulations and thorough testing to verify that compliance. AFSL appreciates and supports the CPSC's efforts to enhance the safety of consumer fireworks through this rulemaking proceeding. If implemented in an integrated and simultaneous manner, we would expect our proposed approach to improve the level of product compliance, both quantitatively and qualitatively, while simultaneously strengthening the CPSC's ability to enforce the applicable regulations and safety standards. We believe the Commission and consumers would benefit from even greater cooperation between AFSL and CPSC in their effort to promote fireworks safety. Together, our two organizations can continue to increase the safety of fireworks used by American consumers. AFSL greatly values the Commission's leadership and dedication to fireworks safety, and we stand ready to assist the CPSC in this area. We thank you for your consideration of our comments. Respectfully submitted,

John D. Rogers Executive Director cc: Christopher Smith, Esquire Brett Crawford, Esquire

Enclosures

Comments provided on September l'l, 2006 by the American Fireworks Standards Laboratory on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking issued by the CPSC on July 11,2006

APPENDIX 1

CASES TESTED BY YEAR
Quality Improvement
6,221,748

QIP Compliance Percentage $ .${a

I

rn compliance

rn Non-Compliance

1

Regular

Assortment
82%

Grand Total Test Cases: 6,221,748 Regular Test Cases: 5,092,397 Assortment Test Cases: I, I 29,351

Missile Wheels Reloadable Tubes Rockets Helicopter Sparklers Mineashell Combinations Ground SpinneSpecialty Firecracker Roman Candle Party Poppers Smoke Fountain

a,

m .a

2

E
0

9 C

3 E
a,

m .-

2

8

E

1

cn

Booby Traps Party Poppers Snakes Missiles Wheels Combinations Helicopter Ground Spinner Smoke Specialty Sparklers Roman Candle Firecracker Rockets Reloadable Tubes Fountain Mine and Shell

'AMERICAN PYROTECHNICS ASSOCIATION

FIREWORKS-RELATED INJURY RATES, 1976-2005
Consumption of fireworks in the United States has risen dramatically over the past two and a half decades, from 29 million pounds in 1976 to over 28 1.5 million pounds in 2005. While the industry has seen an 870.7% increase in fireworks consumption per million pounds, there has been a 90.1% decrease' in fireworks-related injuries per 100,000 pounds.

1976

1981

1986

1991

1996

2001

2002

2003

2 W

2005

(mrAn ku o ,. q I

1 Million Ibs.

I n j u r i e s 1 100K lbs.

-

' 1976 fireworks-related injury rate was 38.3 per 100,000 pounds, compared to 2005 rate of 3.8 per 100,000 pounds.
Source: American Pyrofechnics Association

-

'AMERICAN PYROTECHNICS ASSOCIATION

Fireworks-Related Injury Rates, 1976-2005

Summary of Trade and Tariff Information -Fireworks (TSUS Item 755.15), U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, D.C. 2 National Electronic Injury Surveillance System, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Washington, D.C.
Source: American Pyrotechnics Association

1